THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 


By  the  Same  AutJior. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY.  A  Study  of  the 
Origin  and  Con-elation  of  the  Doctrinal  Teach- 
ings of  the  Apostle  Paul.     Cr.  8vo     S2.00o 


THE  ^^.^i^ui./lL  S^ 

JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

A  STUDY  OF  THE 

DOCTRINAL   CONTENTS 

OF 

THE   GOSPEL   AND   EPISTLES  OF 
THE   APOSTLE   JOHN 


BY 

GEORGE  B.  STEVENS,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

PUOFESSOK   OF   NEW   TESTAMENT    CRITICISM    AND   INTERPRETATION 
IN   YALE   UNIVERSITY 


NEW    YORK 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS 

1899 


Copyright,  1894, 
Bt  Chables  Scbibner's  Sons. 


JSntbtrsttg  Press: 
JoHM  Wilson  and  Son,  Cambridge,  U.S.A. 


TO 

TIMOTHY    DWIGHT,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

PRESIDENT  OF  YALE  UNIVEKSITS" 

MY   INSTKUCTOK  AND   MY    PKEDECESSOR  IN   THE   CHAIK  OF   NEW 
TESTAMENT    INTERPRETATION 

I    DEDICATE    THIS   VOLUME 

AS    A    TOKEN    OF    GRATITUDE    AND    AFFECTION 


PEEFACE 

The  aim  of  this  volume  is  to  present,  in  system- 
atic form,  the  theological  contents  of  the  Gospel  and 
Epistles  of  John.  No  account  is  here  taken  of  the 
Apocalypse,  since,  whatever  view  be  held  respecting 
its  authorship,  it  represents  a  type  of  teaching  so 
peculiar  in  its  form  and  matter  that  it  should  be 
treated  separately.  Accordingly,  most  writers  on 
Biblical  theology  discuss  its  contents  as  a  distinct 
subject,  whether  they  ascribe  it  to  the  author  of  the 
Gospel  and  Epistles  or  not. 

The  purpose  of  my  work  also  determines  its  scope. 
My  plan  did  not  require  me  to  discuss  the  vexed 
literary  questions  connected  with  the  writings  which 
form  the  subject  of  my  study.  I  ascribe  these 
writings  to  the  apostle  John,  but  my  task  would  not 
have  been  essentially  different  upon  any  other  sup- 
position respecting  their  authorship.  The  Gospel 
and  Epistles  which  are  commonly  attributed  to 
John  present  a  certain  distinctive  type  of  Christian 
teaching,  and  this  it  has  been  my  effort  to  interpret. 
I  should  have  undertaken  briefly  to  trace  the  history 
and  describe  the  present  state  of  criticism  respecting 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  had  not  this  work  been  ade- 
quately done  by  others.     I  would  refer  the  reader,  in 


Vlll  PREFACE 

this  connection,  to  two  articles  by  Professors  Schiirer 
and  Sanday,  respectively,  in  the  Contemporary  Revieiv 
for  September  and  October,  1891.  Schiirer's  article 
presents  the  negative,  Sanday's  the  positive  view 
respecting  the  apostolic  authorship  of  the  Gospel. 
The  history  of  this  controversy  is  reviewed  at  length, 
on  the  conservative  side,  by  Archdeacon  Watkins, 
in  his  Bampton  Lectures  for  1890,  entitled  Moderri 
Criticism  considered  in  its  Relation  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  I  would  especially  commend  to  the  student 
the  arguments  for  the  apostolic  authorship  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  by  Dr.  Ezra  Abbot, ^  Bishop  Lightfoot,^ 

1  The  AutliorsMp  of  the  Fourth  Gospel :  External  Evidences,  pub- 
lished in  Dr.  Abbot's  posthumous  Critical  Essays,  Boston,  1888 ; 
also  in  a  volume  entitled  The  Fourth  Gospel  (Charles  Scribner's 
Sons,  New  York,  1892),  which  contains  one  of  the  articles  of 
Bishop  Lightfoot  referred  to  in  the  next  note,  and  another  by 
Dr.  A.  P.  Peabody.  These  last  two  articles  are  on  the  internal 
evidence.  Dr.  Abbot's  Essay  is  also  published  separately 
(Boston,  1880).  It  was  originally  printed  in  The  Unitarian 
Review  for  February,  March,  and  June,  1880.  Statements  of  the 
argument,  on  the  negative  side,  may  be  found  in  Keim's  Jesus 
of  Nazara,  S.  Davidson's  Introduction,  Iloltzmann's  Einleitung 
and  Hand-Commentar,  E.  A.  Abbott's  article  Gospels  in  the 
Encyclopcedia  Britannica,  and  Cone's  Gospel  Criticism  and  His- 
torical Christianity. 

2  Two  dissertations,  one  on  the  internal  and  the  other  on 
the  external  evidence,  will  be  found  in  the  late  Bishop  Light- 
foot's  Biblical  Essays  (London  and  New  York,  1893).  The 
former  of  these  was  originally  published  in  The  Expositor  for 
January,  February,  and  March,  1890,  and  was  reprinted  in  the 
volume,  The  Fourth  Gospel,  referred  to  in  the  preceding  note. 
The  essay  on  the  external  evidence  was  printed  from  lecture- 


PREFACE  ix 

and  President  Dwight.^  Mr.  R.  B.  Button's  essay 
on  The  Historical  Problems  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  (in 
his  Theological  Essays)  is  an  able  review  and  refuta- 
tion of  Baur's  objections  to  its  genuineness. 

The  problem  of  authorship  is  not  the  only  literary 
problem  which  the  Fourth  Gospel  presents.  For 
those  who  hold  John  to  be  its  author  there  remains 
the  interesting  and  important  question  as  to  its  his 
torical  accuracy.  Its  account  of  the  words  and  deeds 
of  Jesus  differs  to  such  an  extent  in  language  and 
subject-matter  from  the  account  contained  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  that  candid  scholarship  cannot 
avoid  the  inquiry  as  to  their  relation  and  relative 
correctness.  Are  we  to  suppose  that  Jesus  uttered 
verbatim  the  long  discourses  which  John  reports,  and 
which  are  so  different  in  style  and  matter  from  the 
Synoptic  discourses  ?  It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that 
at  least  the  form  of  these  reports  is  moi'e  or  less 
affected  by  the  apostle's  own  thought  and  reflection. 
But  this  admission  implies  a  subjective  element 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  To  define  its  limits  with 
absolute  precision  is  a  task  for  which  we  have  no 
adequate   data.     We  can    establish   the    substantial 

notes  and  is  found  only  in  Biblical  Essays.  In  this  same  vol- 
ume are  found  important  additions  to  the  essay  on  the  internal 
evidence  as  originally  published.  The  two  essays,  with  the 
additions,  make  nearly  two  hundred  pages  of  the  volume,  and 
are  of  the  highest  value. 

*  Introductory  Sugcjestions  with  reference  to  the  Intej'nal  Evi- 
dence, appended  to  vol.  i.  of  the  American  edition  of  Godet's 
Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  New  York,  1886. 


X  PREFACE 

agreement  in  underlying  ideas  between  John's  ver- 
sion of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  and  that  of  the  Synop- 
tists.  It  would  seem  evident,  however,  that  the 
apostle  has  given  us  this  teaching  in  his  own  words, 
and  in  the  shape  and  color  which  it  had  assumed 
through  long  reflection  upon  its  contents  and  mean- 
ing. But  whatever  conclusion  may  be  reached 
respecting  these  problems,  it  holds  true  that 
the  Fourth  Gospel  represents  in  all  its  parts  the 
Johannine  theology.  The  question  concerning  the 
subjective  element  in  John  is  a  question  for  literary 
criticism  rather  than  for  Biblical  theology.  Since 
we  have  to  deal  exclusively  with  the  contents  of 
the  book  as  a  product  of  its  author's  mind,  the 
validity  of  our  results  will  not  be  dependent  upon 
any  views  which  may  be  entertained  respecting  the 
accuracy  of  his  narratives. 

In  the  preparation  of  this  volume  I  have  pursued 
substantially  the  same  method  as  was  employed  in 
my  treatise  on  the  Pauline  Theology.  ^  I  have 
sought  to  exhibit  the  salient  features  of  the  type  of 
teaching  with  which  I  have  dealt,  and  to  show  how 
the  leading  ideas  stand  related  to  one  another  and 
to  the  writer's  method  of  thought.  Since  this 
method  is  intuitional  rather  than  logical,  it  is  more 
difficult  than  in  the  case  of  Paul  to  determine  pre- 
cisely the  correlation  of  his  ideas.     It  has  seemed  to 

1  The  Pauline  Theology,  a  Study  of  the  Origin  and  Cor- 
relation of  the  Doctrinal  Teachings  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  Charles 
Scribner's  Sons,  New  York,  1892. 


PREFACE  xi 

me,  however,  that  this  task  could  be,  in  a  good 
degree,  accomplished  by  giving  close  attention  to 
the  peculiarities  of  John's  thinking,  and  by  taking  as 
our  guides  a  few  fundamental  and  comprehensive 
ideas  in  which  his  whole  theology  seems  to  centre. 
In  the  first  chapter  on  the  peculiarities  of  John's 
theology  I  have  sought  to  indicate  how  the  scattered 
elements  of  doctrine  in  John  may  be  traced  up  into 
the  unity  of  certain  great  comprehensive  conceptions. 
I  have  hoped  by  applying  this  method,  to  make  clear 
the  genetic  connection  of  the  writer's  thoughts,  and 
the  real  unity  and  simplicity  of  his  teaching. 

The  Bibliography  which  is  appended  to  the  volume 
will  guide  the  student  to  the  most  important  recent 
literature  of  the  subject.  I  have  thought  that  it 
would  prove  useful,  in  addition,  to  prefix  to  each 
chapter  a  special  account  of  the  literature  which 
might  well  be  consulted  in  the  further  study  of  the 
various  topics  treated.  I  have  made  these  references 
somewhat  detailed  by  giving  specific  titles,  number 
of  pages,  etc.,  in  order  that  the  student  may  form 
some  judgment  in  advance  respecting  the  nature  and 
scope  of  the  discussions.  These  various  references 
to  literature  may  also  serve  to  indicate  my  own 
indebtedness  to  other  writers  on  the  theology  of 
John.  I  have  derived  more  or  less  assistance  from 
almost  all  the  authors  to  whose  writings  I  have 
referred.  My  work  has  been  chiefly  done,  however, 
on  the  basis  of  the  text  itself.  I  have  been  more 
aided  by  a  few  standnrd  commentaries  —  especially 


xn  PREFACE 

those  of  Meyer,  Westcott,  Haupt,  Weiss,  and  Plum- 
mer —  than  by  any  other  books  outside  the  Johannine 
writings  themselves. 

No  treatise  which  purports  to  ■  furnish  a  critical 
and  systematic  presentation  of  the  theology  of  John 
has  hitherto  been  composed  in  English.  The  works 
of  Sears,  Lias,  and  Peyton,  which  are  cited  in  the 
Bibliography  under  the  head  of  Treatises  on  the 
Johannine  Theology,  are  either  too  limited  in  scope, 
or  too  apologetic  or  purely  practical  in  aim,  to  be 
regarded  as  works  on  Biblical  theology  in  any 
very  strict  sense.  Nor  is  there  any  recent  German 
work  distinctly  on  the  subject.  The  most  recent 
and  the  most  satisfactory  one  —  at  least,  as  respects 
method,  scope,  and  thoroughness  —  is  that  of  Weiss, 
published  in  1862.  It  can  hardly  be  doubted,  there- 
fore, that  there  is  room  in  our  theological  literature 
for  an  exposition  of  the  theology  of  John,  which 
shall  set  forth  the  salient  features  of  this  great  tpyc 
of  New  Testament  teaching.  The  Johannine  con- 
ceptions of  religious  truth  are  destined  to  hold  a 
larger  place  in  theological  thought  than  has  usually 
been  accorded  to  them.  I  shall  be  gratified  if  this 
volume  serves  in  some  measure  to  elucidate  and 
emphasize  some  of  those  conceptions,  to  make  more 
manifest  their  great  depth  and  richness,  and  to 
illustrate  their  value  for  Christian  thought  and  life. 

G.  B.  S. 
Yale  University, 
Se/)^  1,  1894. 


CONTENTS 

Chapter  Page 

I.    The  Peculiarities  of  John's  Theology     .     .  1 
II.    The   Relation   of   John's   Theology   to   the 

Old  Testament 22 

III.  The  Idea  of  God  in  the  Writings  of  John  46 

IV.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Logos 74 

V.    The  Union  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  102 

VI.    The  Doctrine  of  Sin 127 

VII.   The  Work  of  Salvation 156 

VIII.    The  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit     ....  189 

IX.   The  Appropriation  of  Salvation      .     ,     .     .  218 
X.   The   Origin  and   Nature  of   the  Spiritual 

Life o 241 

XI.    The  Doctrine  of  Love     . 266 

XII.    The  Doctrine  op  Prayer 290 

XIII.  The  Doctrine  of  Eternal  Life 312 

XIV.  The  Johannine  Eschatology 328 

XV.   The    Theology  of  John  and  of  Paul  Com- 
pared    355 

Bibliography 373 

Index  of  Texts 377 

General  Index  .     » 381 


THE  JOHANNINE    THEOLOGY 

» 

CHAPTER  I 

THE   PECULIARITIES    OF   JOHN'S   THEOLOGY 

Literature.  —  Westcott  :  The  Gospel  according  to  St.  John, 
Characteristics  of  the  Gospel,  pp.  Ixvi.-lxxvii. ;  Weiss  :  Bibl. 
TheoL,  The  Character  of  the  Johannean  Theology,  ii.  315-320 
(orig.  589-593) ;  Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  TheoL,  Eigenart  des 
Lehrbegriffs,  ii.  404-406 ;  Kostlin  :  Johann.  Lehrhegriff,  AU- 
gemeiner  Character  des  Johanneischen  Lehrbegriffs,  pp.  38-72 ; 
Sears  :  The  Heart  of  Christ,  The  Johannean  Writings,  their 
Congruity,  Interior  Relations,  etc.,  pp.  64-90;  Gloag:  Intro- 
duction to  the  Johannine  Writings,  The  Theology  of  John,  pp.  236- 
263;  Farrar  :  The  Early  Days  of  Christianity,  chap,  xxxiii.. 
Characteristics  of  the  Mind  and  Style  of  St.  John  (various  edi- 
tions) ;  Reuss  :  Hist,  of  Christ.  TheoL,  etc..  General  Outline  of 
the  Theology  of  John,  ii.  375-382  (orig.  ii.  418-428)  ;  Haupt  : 
The  First  Epistle  of  John,  Theological  Principles  of  the  Epistle, 
pp.  375-385  (orig.  pp.  320-329)  ;  Cone  :  The  Gospel  and  its  Earli- 
est Interpretations,  etc.,  chap,  v.,  The  Johannine  Transformation, 
pp.  267-317 ;  IIorton  :  Revelation  and  the  Bible,  The  Johan- 
nine Writings,  pp.  369-402 ;  Neander  :  Planting  and  Train- 
ing of  the  Christian  Church,  The  Doctrine  of  John,  ii.  28-57 
(Bohned.);  E.  Caird:  The  Evolution  of  Religion,  The  Gospel 
of  St.  John  and  the  Idea  of  a  Divine  Humanity,  ii.  217-243. 

Biblical  theology  undertakes  to  define  the  peculiar- 
ities of  the  various  types  of  teaching  which  are  found 
in  Sacred  Scripture.  It  aims  to  distinguish  each  type 
as  sharply  as  possible  from  every  other,  in  order  to 

1 


2  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

set  the  given  writer's  method  of  thought  and  style 
of  argument  in  the  strongest  rehef.  Tliis  process 
docs  not  prejudice  the  underlying  unity  of  the  differ- 
ent types,  but  by  its  sharp  discriminations  it  enables 
us  to  define  the  nature  and  limitations  of  that  unity. 
The  fundamental  unity  in  doctrine  among  the  various 
Biblical  books  cannot  be  clearly  discerned  without  a 
close  study  of  each  author  separately,  or  of  each  group 
of  books  which  naturally  belong  together. 

No  type  of  New  Testament  teaching  has  more  of 
individuality  than  the  Johannine ;  none  has  charac- 
teristics at  once  more  marked  and  more  difficult  to 
define.  The  peculiarities  of  John's  thought  elude 
exact  description.  They  are  felt  by  all  attentive 
readers,  but  they  almost  defy  the  effort  to  deduce 
from  them  the  modes  and  laws  of  the  writer's  own 
thinking  upon  the  great  themes  of  religion. 

I  should  place  among  the  most  prominent  of  John's 
peculiarities  the  tendency  to  group  his  thoughts  around 
certain  great  central  truths.  Whatever  may  have 
been  the  actual  order  in  which  his  ideas  were  un- 
folded in  his  mind,  it  is  noticeable  that  in  his  presen- 
tation of  them  in  the  Gospel  and  in  the  First  Epistle 
his  thought  moves  out  from  certain  formative  and 
determining  conceptions  which  he  has  of  his  subject. 
Whatever  be  the  interpretation  of  the  prologue,  or 
the  origin  of  its  ideas,  it  is  certain  that  it  is  designed 
to  present  the  apostle's  loftiest  conception  of  the  per- 
son of  his  Master  and  of  his  relation  to  mankind. 
The  writer  starts  from  this  height  of  contemplation. 


PECULIARITIES   OF  JOHN'S   THEOLOGY  3 

In  a  way  somewhat  analogous,  the  First  Epistle  opens 
with  a  reference  to  eternity,  in  which  the  content  of 
the  gospel  message  was  stored  up  ready  to  come  to 
the  world  in  Christ.  In  both  cases  this  secret  of 
God  which  is  to  be  disclosed  to  mankind  is  life  or 
light.  The  Word  was  the  bearer  of  life,  "  and  the 
life  was  the  light  of  men "  (i.  4)  ;  ^  so  also  in  the 
Epistle  the  import  of  the  heavenly  mystery  which 
Jesus  discloses  is  life  (I.  i.  2),  and  the  "message" 
which  he  brought  to  the  world  is  summed  up  in  the 
truth  that  "God  is  light"  (I.  i.  5). 

We  thus  see  how  the  apostle  has  concentrated  his 
thought  upon  a  profound  conception,  which  hence- 
forth became  for  him  the  epitome  of  all  that  lie  had 
to  teach.  He  grounds  the  work  of  Christ  in  his  per- 
son. It  is,  in  part,  this  order  of  thought  which  leads 
him  to  place  his  highest  claims  for  the  person  of 
Christ  at  the  opening  of  his  Gospel.  The  incarnate 
life  of  Jesus  is,  to  use  one  of  Horace  Bushnell's 
words,  the  "  transactional "  revelation  of  principles 
and  forces  which  are  essential  and  eternal  in  his 
very  being.  Ilis  bringing  of  life  and  light  to  men 
on  his  mission  to  earth  was  grounded  in  the  larger 
and  deeper  truth  that  he  had  always  been  illumining 
the  minds  of  men.     All  through  the  Old  Testament 

1  Passages  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  referred  to  simply 
by  chapter  and  verse,  without  any  further  designation,  thus  : 
viii.  42.  To  passages  from  the  Epistles  I  have  prefixed  a 
numeral  in  large  type,  indicating  the  nvimber  of  the  Epistle 
from  which  the  citation  is  made,  thus  :  I.  iv.  8  :  II.  4,  etc. 


4  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

period  of  revelation  the  true  light  of  the  Logos  was 
shining  into  the  lives,  not  of  the  Jews  only,  but  of  all 
men  (i.  9,  10).  This  fact,  again,  was  based  on  the 
essential  nature  of  the  Logos,  who  was  with  God  in 
the  beginning,  and  was  God.  But  in  the  development 
of  his  thought  John  starts  from  this  last  and  highest 
point.  Thus,  the  specific  Messianic  mission  of  Jesus 
to  earth  is  grounded  in  his  universal  relation  to  the 
world  and  man,  and  this  relation,  in  turn,  is  grounded 
in  his  essential  nature. 

In  accord  with  this  mode  of  thought,  we  find  that 
the  action  of  God  is  always  conceived  of  as  springing 
from  the  divine  nature.  John  is  thus  by  pre-eminence 
the  theologian  in  the  original  sense  of  that  A\'ord. 
More  explicitly  than  any  other  New  Testament  writer 
he  sets  his  idea  of  God  in  relation  to  all  liis  teaching. 
What  God  has  done  in  revelation  and  redemption  it 
was  according  to  his  nature  to  do.  If  God  has  loved 
the  world,  it  is  because  he  is  love.  If  he  has  en- 
lightened the  world,  it  is  because  he  is  light.  In 
revealing  himself  to  men  in  Christ,  he  has  expressed 
under  a  personal  form  his  own  thoughts,  feelings,  and 
will.  The  revelation  docs  not  consist  primarily  in 
announcements  made  about  God  ;  it  consists  rather 
in  the  coming  to  men  of  One  who,  in  liis  own  person 
and  character,  is  a  transcript  of  the  divine  nature.  In 
John's  interpretation  of  the  revelation,  it  consists  in 
what  Jesus  Christ  is,  in  his  power  to  say  :  "  I  and  the 
Father  are  one  "  (x.  30)  ;  "  He  that  hath  seen  me 
hath  seen  the  Father"  (xiv.  9).     God  has  not  merely 


PECULIARITIES   OF   JOHNS   THEOLOGY  5 

sent  to  mankind  a  message,  but  has  come  to  the 
world  in  Christ,  who  embodies  in  his  own  person  the 
Father's  will  and  natuie. 

It  is  very  clear  that  in  the  First  Epistle,  John  de- 
duces his  whole  teaching  concerning  the  nature  and 
demands  of  the  Christian  life  from  the  idea  of  the 
ethical  nature  of  God.  Having  said  that  the  import 
of  the  gospel  message  is  that  God  is  light  (I.  i.  5),  he 
proceeds  to  show  that  this  holy  purity  of  God  must, 
on.  the  one  hand,  make  Christians  see  and  feel  that 
sin  still  clings  to  them,  and,  on  the  other,  show  them 
what  is  the  true  nature  of  the  life  which  they  profess. 
When  we  know  that  God  is  light  we  know  that  we 
are  still  sinful,  but  we  also  see  the  path  which  leads 
from  all  sin  unto  himself.  In  the  light  of  God  we 
see  that  he  has  provided  for  the  forgiveness  of  our 
sins  and  for  our  fellowship  with  each  other  in  Chris- 
tian love.  These  ideas  are  unfolded  by  no  formal 
process  of  reasoning ;  but  they  are  not,  on  that 
account,  less  plainly  developed  from  the  truth  that 
God  is  light  (I.  i.  5-ii.  6). 

This  truth  also  involves  the  principle  and  duty  of 
love.  Light  and  love  are  synonyms.  He  that  loves 
is  dwelling  and  walking  in  the  liglit,  while  he  who 
hates  is  in  darkness.  The  nature  of  God  as  light  or 
love  determines  the  law  and  requirement  of  the  Chris- 
tian life  (I.  ii.  7-11).  The  same  relation  is  defined 
even  more  explicitly  in  I.  iv.  7-21,  where  the  apostle 
shows  that  since  God  is  love,  the  principle  of  love 
is  the  essential  requirement  of  religion  and  the  bond 


6  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  all  true  brotherhood.  Love  is  divine.  It  has 
its  primal  source  in  God.  The  love  of  God  for  us 
explains  our  endowment  with  capacity  to  love  him  in 
return,  and  this  answering  love  of  the  heart  to  God 
carries  with  it  the  obligation  to  love  our  fellow-men, 
who  are  one  with  us  by  virtue  of  a  common  nature, 
and  by  being,  like  ourselves,  the  object  of  God's 
fatherly  love.  The  tendency  of  John  to  refer  all  the 
duties  and  demands  of  religion  to  the  moral  nature 
of  God  as  their  source  and  norm,  is  nowhere  better 
illustrated  than  in  the  passage  :  "  Beloved,  let  us  love 
one  another :  for  love  is  of  God ;  and  every  one  that 
loveth  is  begotten  of  God,  and  knoweth  God.  He 
that  loveth  not  knoweth  not  God  ;  for  God  is  love  " 
(L  iv.  7,  8). 

This  peculiarity  of  thought,  which  centralizes  ideas 
in  their  logical  source  or  ground,  is  pervading  and 
fundamental  in  the  writings  of  John.  It  is  partially 
described  by  the  terms  by  which  the  Gospel  and 
Epistles  are  commonly  characterized,  such  as  "  spirit- 
ual," "intuitive,"  "contemplative."  These  and  kin- 
dred designations  have  their  truth  in  the  fact  that 
the  apostle's  mind  penetrates  to  the  heart  of  things, 
and  dwells  in  rapt  contemplation  upon  those  deepest 
realities  with  which  all  true  religion  is  mainly  con- 
cerned. Religion  is  altogether  a  matter  of  personal 
relations.  It  is  God-likeness,  fellowship  with  Christ, 
sympathy  with  his  spirit,  fraternal  helpfulness  among 
men.  John's  treatment  of  the  truths  of  religion  is 
intensely  ethical  and  spiritual.     It  deals  wholly  with 


PECULIARITIES   OF  JOHNS   THEOLOGY  7 

the  relations  between  God  and  man,  and  with  those 
of  men  to  one  another.  It  is  characterized  by  an 
intense  sense  of  God.  It  is  contemplative,  mystical, 
emotional,  but  not  in  the  sense  of  being  vague  or 
shadowy.  The  most  secure  of  all  realities  is  God. 
The  apostle  is  most  certain  as  to  what  kind  of  a 
being,  in  his  essential  nature,  God  is,  especially  in  his 
feeling  toward  the  world.  He  knows  that  he  is  light, 
—  pure,  glorious,  diffusive,  beneficent,  life-giving.  He 
knows  that  he  is  love,  —  condescending,  pitying, 
sympathetic,  forgiving.  These  deep  truths  he  has 
read  in  the  life  of  Christ.  Of  all  the  disciples  he 
most  clearly  penetrated  to  those  divinest  truths 
which  lay  at  the  root  of  every  specific  precept,  par- 
able, or  miracle  of  the  Saviour.  To  John  the  life, 
teaching,  and  death  of  Jesus  are  the  language  in 
which  God  has  written  out  most  plainly  his  deepest 
thoughts  and  feelings  toward  mankind.  His  con- 
ception of  the  life  of  Christ  is  well  expressed  in 
Tennyson's  lines :  — 

And  so  the  AVord  had  breath,  and  wrought 
With  human  hands  tlie  creed  of  creeds 
In  loveliness  of  perfect  deeds. 

Just  as  the  acts  of  God  flow  out  of  his  nature,  and 
the  work  of  Christ  is  grounded  on  what  he  is,  so  the 
acts  and  choices  of  men  are  determined  by  what  the 
men  are  in  their  fixed  preferences  and  character. 
This  correspondence  between  character  and  conduct 
John  does  not  conceive  after  the  manner  of  philo- 
sophical determinism  ;  he  treats    it  as  the  result  of 


8  THE  johanninp:  theology 

an  ethical  necessity.  The  Jews  did  not  understand 
Jesus'  speech  because  they  could  not  hear  his  word 
(viii.  43).  It  was  none  the  less  true  that  they  would 
not  hear  it.  The  moral  inability  to  hear  his  word 
sprang  out  of  their  deep-set  opposition  in  character 
and  spirit  to  that  which  he  taught.  In  such  cases 
the  ethical  kinship  of  men  is  often  denoted  by  say- 
ing that  they  are  "  of  God  "  (viii.  42,  47 ;  I.  iii.  10  ; 
I.  iv.  4, 6),  or  "  of  the  devil  "  (I.  iii.  8)  ;  "  of  the  truth  " 
(I.  iii.  19),  or  "of  the  world"  (I.  ii.  15,  16  ;  I.  iv.  5), 
and  the  like.  A  man  does  the  things  which  are 
consonant  with  the  moral  sphere  of  motive  and  in 
terest  to  which  he  belongs,  and  in  which  he  dwells 
and  walks.  To  be  of  God,  or  to  be  born  of  God,  is 
to  live  a  life  of  which  God  is  the  determining  power  ; 
to  be  of  the  Evil  One  is  to  live  a  life  of  sin.  He 
who  is  of  the  truth  is  described  as  belonging  to  it, 
so  that  it  is  his  encompassing  clement,  determining 
the  whole  quality  and  tendency  of  his  being.  The 
truth  is  in  him  ;  he  does  not  merely  possess  it ;  it 
has  its  seat  and  home  in  him,  and  sways  his  life  in 
all  its  aspirations  and  issues.  He,  on  the  other  hand, 
who  is  of  the  world,  lives  a  life  of  transitory  pleas- 
ures, and  all  the  expressions  of  his  interest  and 
desire  are  determined  by  ■  motives  of  selfishness. 

It  naturally  results  from  this  mode  of  view  that 
man  is  regarded  as  a  unit  in  all  his  powers  and 
actions.  All  the  acts  of  a  man  involve  his  total 
personality.  This  is  the  reason  why  terms  descrip- 
tive of  acts  and  choices  have  with  John  so  compre- 


PECULIARITIES   OF   JOHNS   THEOLOGY  9 

hcnsivc  a  sense.  To  know  the  truth,  for  example, 
is  to  be  free,  and  to  have  eternal  life  ;  but  this  does 
not  mean,  for  the  apostle,  that  the  religious  life  is 
an  intellectual  affair,  consisting  in  the  mere  posses- 
sion of  knowledge.  To  know  the  truth  is  to  possess 
it  as  a  determining  power  in  one's  life  ;  to  know  God 
is  to  be  in  harmony  and  sympathy  with  his  will. 
John's  mode  of  thought  is,  in  these  respects,  syn- 
thetic rather  than  analytic.  He  never  separates  mind 
and  heart,  will  and  emotion.  In  this  he  is  true  to 
life.  The  truths  of  religion  make  their  appeal  to 
the  entire  man.  He  who  really  knows  God,  in  the 
apostle's  sense  of  the  word  know,  also  obeys,  trusts, 
and  loves  God.  These  various  terms  designate,  no 
doubt,  distinguishable  phases  of  the  religious  life 
and  spirit ;  but  they  cannot  be  separated,  and  should 
not  be  treated  as  if  they  could  exist  apart.  The 
application  of  analytic  thought  to  religion  breaks  it  up 
into  various  departments,  and  often  subdivides  these, 
making  the  religious  life  an  elaborate  progrannnc, 
and  the  conditions  of  salvation  an  extended  series  of 
exercises  or  ordo  salutis.  Jolni's  mode  of  thought  is 
the  opposite  of  all  this.  He  simplifies  and  unifies  acts 
and  experiences  which  modern  minds  have  learned 
sharply  to  discriminate,  and  even  to  treat  apart. 

It  certainly  can  be  justly  said  that,  necessary  as 
discrimination  and  analysis  are  in  dealing  with  the 
truths  of  religion,  the  apostle's  method  of  thought  is 
that  which  corresponds  best  with  normal  and  healthy 
religious  life.     His  conception  of  religion  is  adverse 


10  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

to  all  narrowness  and  one-sidedness.  As  against  the 
Gnostic  over-emphasis  of  knowledge,  he  insisted  that 
he  only  who  does  righteousness  is  righteous  (I.  iii.  7). 
The  mere  intellectual  possession  of  truth  cannot  suf- 
fice ;  truth  is  not  merely  something  to  be  known, 
but  something  to  be  done  (iii.  21 ;  I.  i.  6).  The 
Christian  is  to  walk  in  the  truth  as  his  native  ele- 
ment (II.  4 ;  III.  3,  4)  ;  the  truth  dwells  within  him 
(viii.  44;  I.  ii.  4),  controls  and  guides  him;  he 
belongs  to  it,  and  draws  from  it  the  strength  and 
inspiration  of  his  life  (xviii.  37;  1.  ii.  21;  I.  iii.  ]9). 
Doctrine  and  life  are  inseparable.  John  never  thinks 
of  the  truths  of  religion  as  dead,  cold  forms  which 
one  might  hold  without  living  the  life  which  corre- 
sponds to  them.  Such  a  mere  intellectual  assent  to 
truth  would  have  for  religion,  in  his  view,  no  value 
or  significance.  Religion  is  life  after  the  type  which 
has  been  perfectly  exemplified  in  Jesus  Christ;  but 
it  is  life  in  a  full  and  rich,  not  in  a  narrow  and  lim- 
ited, sense.  It  is  a  life  that  is  abundant,  a  life  which 
embraces  the  fullest  activity  and  best  development 
of  the  entire  man.  All  powers  and  gifts  should  con- 
tribute to  its  enrichment.  It  should  draw  its  suj)plies 
from  the  deepest  sources,  —  abiding  fellowship  with 
God,  and  ethical  likeness  to  him.  Neither  a  barren 
intellectualism  nor  a  dreamy  and  unpractical  mys- 
ticism in  religion  could  ever  develop  along  the  lines 
of  teaching  which  John  has  marked  out.  All  such 
excesses  would  be  excluded  by  the  very  comprehen- 
siveness and  depth  of  his  idea. 


PECULIARITIES   OF   JOHN  S   THEOLOGY        11 

The  mind  of  the  apostle  seems  to  sec  all  things  in 
their  principles  and  essential  ideas.  This  peculiarity 
of  thought  gives  rise  to  a  species  of  realism.  All 
the  forces  of  goodness  are  comprehended  by  him 
under  some  general  idea,  like  light  or  truth,  while 
all  the  forms  of  evil  are  summed  up  as  darkness  or 
falsehood.  The  whole  course  of  history  illustrates 
the  conflict  of  these  opposing  powers  or  principles. 
The  individual  is  allied  to  the  one  or  to  the  other. 
The  character  and  actions  of  men  correspond  to  the 
principle  which  sways  their  lives.  Individual  acts 
spring  out  of  the  deep  affinities  of  the  soul.  What 
men  desire  and  choose  is  determined  with  a  moral 
necessity  by  the  governing  idea  of  their  lives.  "  Thus 
it  happens,"  as  Haupt  has  so  aptly  said,  "  that  his- 
tory appears  to  John  not  so  much  as  a  sum  of  indi- 
vidual free  human  acts,  interwoven  with  one  another, 
but  rather  is  for  him  a  great  organism, — if  one  will 
not  object  to  the  word,  ^a  process,  the  inner  law  of 
whose  development  is  as  much  prescribed  to  it,  and 
as  naturally  flows  from  it,  as  the  plant  springs  from 
the  seed.  For  everything  individual  stands  inevit- 
ably and  immediately,  consciously  or  unconsciously, 
in  the  service  of  the  idea.  History  is  for  John  the 
outworking  of  the  idea,  the  body  which  the  idea 
assumes  to  itself ;  and  this  body  is  naturally  con- 
formed to  the  soul  —  that  is,  to  the  idea — which 
builds  it  for  itself.  History  is  the  invisible  trans- 
lated into  the  visible."  ^ 

^  Der  erste  Brief  des  Johmines,  pp.  321,  322. 


12  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

The  apostle's  habit  of  thinking  in  antitheses  is  an 
illustration  of  this  peculiarity  of  his  mind.  Accord- 
ingly, his  writings  are  characterized  by  a  species  of 
dualism,  —  not  the  metaphysical  dualism  which  makes 
evil  an  essential  and  eternal  principle  of  the  universe, 
but  a  moral  dualism  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  finds 
illustration  in  human  history  from  the  beginning  of 
the  race.  The  moral  history  of  mankind  is  the  con- 
flict of  light  and  darkness,  the  shining  of  the  true 
light  in  the  world's  darkness,  and  an  appropriation, 
but  slow  and  partial,  of  the  light  by  the  darkness. 

Attention  should  here  be  directed  to  the  way  in 
which  John  conceives  religion,  as  consisting  in  this 
immediate  personal  relation  of  the  soul  to  God  or  to 
Christ.  Religion  is,  above  all  things,  fellowship  with 
God,  and  this  fellowship  involves  likeness  to  God.  It 
is  such  an  abiding  in  God,  such  a  walking  in  his  light, 
that  the  soul  becomes  possessed  of  something  of  the 
purity  and  love  which  dwell  perfectly  in  God.  The 
religious  life  begins  with  an  impartation  from  God. 
To  be  born  of  God  means  to  receive  from  him  a  com- 
munication of  spiritual  life  whereby  the  soul  is  more 
and  more  transformed  into  Christlikeness.  To  the 
mind  of  John  religion  signifies  the  progressive  attain- 
ment by  man  of  his  true  type  or  idea,  —  not,  indeed, 
by  efforts  of  his  own,  but  by  his  appropriation  and  use 
of  that  divine  power  which  God  freely  bestows  upon 
him.  To  be  begotten  of  God  is  to  be  righteous,  even 
as  Christ  is  righteous  (I.  ii.  29).  The  Christlike  life  is 
the  true  life,  and  the  only  true  life.     Hence  our  author 


PECULIARITIES   OF  JOHN'S    THEOLOGY        13 

insists  with  great  energy  that  Christianity  means 
pure  character.  "  He  that  doeth  righteousness  is 
righteous,  even  as  he  [Christ]  is  righteous  "  (I.  iii.  7). 
Between  the  Christian  life  and  sin  tliere  is  an  abso- 
hite  contrariety  in  principle.  The  Christian  man  is 
characteristically  righteous,  and  while  sin  still  cleaves 
to  him  (I.  i.  8-10),  he  cannot  live  the  life  of  habitual 
sin  {ajxapTiav  ov  Troici)  (1.  iii.  9).  The  Christian  man 
has  been  cleansed ;  but  as  the  traveller  in  Oriental 
lands  needs,  on  coming  in  from  the  dusty  street,  to 
wash  his  feet,  so  the  Christian  needs  to  be  purified 
from  the  sin  which  still  cleaves  to  his  life  (xiii.  10). 
But  supremely  and  characteristically  sinful  he  can- 
not be ;  that  would  be  a  contradiction  in  terms. 
Hence,  with  his  strong  emphasis  on  the  governing 
idea  of  the  religious  life,  and  with  his  intense  sense  of 
its  characteristic  quality,  John  does  not  hesitate  to 
affirm  :  "  Every  one  who  abideth  in  him  sinneth  not  " 
{ovx  dfiaprdvet) ;  "  Every  one  who  has  been  begotten 
from  God  does  not  do  sin,  because  his  seed  abides  in 
him,  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  has  been  begotten 
of  God  "  (I.  iii.  6,  9). 

Another  peculiarity  of  the  Johannine  theology  is 
seen  in  the  way  in  which  the  apostle  blends  the 
religious  life  in  this  world  with  the  eternal  spiritual 
order.  By  his  conception  of  eternal  life  as  a  present 
possession  he  unites  this  world  with  the  world  to 
come.  To  his  mind  the  spiritual  life  is  the  heavenly 
life  already  begun.  He  comprehends  the  particular 
in  the  universal,  and  estimates  all  things  in  the  light 


14  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

of  eternity.  Therefore  the  individual  lite  that  is 
formed  upon  the  divine  pattern  belongs  by  its  very 
nature  to  the  world  of  abiding  realities.  Since  it  is 
the  life  of  fellowship  with  God,  it  partakes  of  his  own 
purity,  and  has  in  it  the  elements  of  true  strength, 
endurance,  and  growth.  The  idea  of  eternal  life 
which  is  fomid  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  springs  directly 
out  of  the  Johannine  mysticism.  Whenever  man 
receives  the  impartation  of  the  Spirit  of  God  and 
walks  in  fellowship  with  God,  eternal  life  is  begun. 
Heaven  and  earth  are  near  together,  and  that  which 
separates  them  is  not  death,  but  sin. 

It  will  be  apparent  from  the  considerations  which 
have  thus  far  been  presented  that  John  has  given  us 
a  purely  ethical  and  spiritual  conception  of  religion. 
The  whole  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  inner  quality  of 
the  life.  True  worship  is  from  the  heart,  and  may  be 
offered  anywhere.  Nothing  is  said  of  institutions, 
not  even  of  the  Church.  No  emphasis  is  laid  upon 
sacraments.  The  establishment  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  not  recorded.  The  references  to  baptism  are  quite 
incidental,  and  are  chiefly  to  John's  baptism.  The 
practice  of  baptism  as  a  Christian  rite  receives  no 
emphasis,  unless  the  somewhat  doubtful  reference  in 
iii.  5,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  the 
Spirit,"  etc.,  be  referred  to  baptism;  and,  in  that 
case,  as  Reuss  remarks,  "  baptism  is  represented  as 
a  symbol  of  the  spiritual  birth,  and  not  as  the  com- 
memorative sign  of  an  association."  ^  It  looks  toward 
1  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.  ii.  491  (oiig.  ii.  548). 


PECULIARITIES   OF  JOHN'S   THEOLOGY        15 

union  with  Christ,  and  not  toward  union  among 
believers  in  a  community.  The  type  of  mind  which 
our  author  illustrates,  naturally  concentrates  its 
interest  mainly  upon  the  immediate  relation  of  the 
soul  to  God.  This  is  not  done  after  the  manner  of 
a  narrow  subjective  individualism.  Duties  to  foilow- 
men  are  repeatedly  emphasized.  The  person  of  Christ 
is  not  for  John  a  mere  ideal  to  be  contemplated  with 
devout  rapture  ;  the  Master's  life  was  the  pattern  of 
service.  It  was  not,  however,  the  outward  aspects  of 
his  life,  but  the  underlying  motives  and  principles 
of  it,  which  appealed  most  powerfully  to  the  mind 
and  heart  of  John.  It  was  not  the  mere  fact  that 
he  once  performed  an  act  of  menial  service  in  wash- 
ing the  disciples'  feet ;  but  it  was  the  relation  in  which 
this  service  stood  to  the  truth  that  he  came  forth 
from  God  and  was  going  unto  God  (xiii.  3),  to  which 
John  attaches  such  great  significance.  Indeed,  the 
whole  historic  life  of  Christ  seemed  to  him  to  be 
grounded  in  the  eternal  self-revealing  impulse  in  God, 
and  to  express  in  terms  of  human  life  and  experience 
the  nature  and  thoughts  of  God  which  in  all  ages  he 
had  been  making  known  in  other  ways  to  men  (i.  4, 
5,  9,  10). 

Let  us  now  raise  the  inquiry.  What  elements  of 
Christian  doctrine  is  the  Johannine  theology  especially 
adapted  to  supply  ?  It  will  hardly  be  questioned,  I 
suppose,  by  any  student  of  theology,  that  the  Johan- 
nine type  of  thought  has  been  far  less  influential  than 
the  Pauline  type  in  slinping  the  great  dogmatic  sys- 


16  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

terns.  The  Christian  doctrine  of  God  has  usually 
been  developed  from  the  legal  conceptions  of  his 
nature  and  relations  to  men  which  underlie  Paul's 
Jewish  forms  of  thought.  The  dominant  idea  of 
John  concerning  the  nature  of  God  as  light  or  love 
has  not  been  the  characteristic  and  central  conception 
of  the  prevailing  historic  theologies.  It  has  had  its 
influence,  but  it  has  not  occupied  the  commanding 
place  which  it  occupied  in  the  mind  of  the  apostle 
John.  Christian  thought  concerning  God  has  con- 
tinued through  all  the  centuries  predominantly  Jewish, 
taking  its  color  from  the  terms  of  Paul's  polemic 
against  Judaism,  and  growing  more  and  more  stereo- 
typed in  that  form  through  the  influence  upon  it  of 
the  severe  logic  of  certain  great  minds  of  a  strongly 
legal  cast,  such  as  Augustine,  Calvin,  and  Grotius. 

In  direct  connection  with  this  legalistic  tendency 
of  thought  concerning  God  stands  the  fact  that  the 
soteriology  of  the  Church  has  been  characteristically 
Pauline.  The  way  of  salvation  has  been  expounded 
in  rigid  adherence  to  Paul's  doctrine  of  juridical  jus- 
tification. The  Pauline  legal  method  of  tliought  — 
rendered  natural  to  his  mind  by  his  Jewish  educa- 
tion, and  made  especially  necessary  by  his  conflicts 
with  Judaizing  errors  —  has,  in  great  part,  given  the 
law  to  all  Christian  thinking  on  the  subject.  The 
conception  of  God's  nature  as  consisting  primarily 
and  essentially  of  retributive  justice,  the  idea  of  his 
absolute  decrees,  and  the  application  of  commercial 
and  governmental  analogies  to  the  work  of  his  grace 


PECULIARITIES   OF   JOHN'S   THEOLOGY        17 

in  redemption,  flow  directly  out  of  the  Jewish  aspects 
of  Paul's  thought.  It  is  aside  from  my  present  pur- 
pose to  pursue  the  inquiry,  how  far  this  development 
of  thought  was  justifiable  and  wholesome,  and  how 
far  one-sided  and  misleading.  The  fact,  however, 
can  hardly  be  denied  that  the  more  mystical  and 
purely  ethical  methods  of  thought  which  are  illus- 
trated in  John  have  had  but  a  sporadic  influence  in 
historic  theology.  I  venture  the  opinion  that  theol- 
ogy would  have  been  vastly  deepened  and  enriched, 
had  the  profoundly  spiritual  thought  of  John  per- 
meated and  shaped  it  in  anything  like  the  degree 
in  which  the  polemics  of  Paul  have  done.  With- 
out detracting  in  the  smallest  measure  from  the 
great  truths  which  Paulinism  has  contributed  to 
Christian  thought,  it  appears  to  me  that  there  is 
much  reason  to  desire  that  the  spiritual  mysticism  of 
John  may  in  time  to  come  acquire  its  legitimate  in- 
fluence in  Christian  theology  and  life.  The  theology 
of  John  is  consonant  in  spirit  with  that  of  Paul  in 
its  highest  ranges  ;  but  it  represents  a  mode  of  thought 
concerning  God  and  his  grace  in  salvation  that  is 
distinctly  higher  than  the  legalism  of  Paul,  which 
he  brought  over  from  Judaism,  and  which  supplied 
his  weapons  of  war  against  his  adversaries  rather 
than  furnished  his  favorite  forms  for  the  purely 
positive  expression  of  the  truths  of  his  gospel.  In 
any  case,  Paul's  more  legal  mode  of  thought  may 
well  be  supplemented  by  John's  more  spiritual  mode ; 
liis    argumentative    handling    of   religious   truth    by 

2 


18  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

John's  more  direct  and  intuitive  presentation  of  it, 
and  his  more  analytic  method  by  John's  more  syn- 
thetic method,  which  binds  together  all  separate 
truths  in  the  great  all-comprehending  truth  that 
God  is  love. 

It  is  not  in  the  interest  of  Christian  thinking 
chiefly,  but  in  the  interest  of  Christian  life,  tliat  I 
would  urge  the  value  of  the  teaching  and  spirit  of 
the  Johannine  writings.  The  tendency  of  an  in- 
creased appreciation  and  application  of  John's  methods 
of  thought  must  be  to  lead  to  a  better  adjustment 
of  doctrine  and  life.  A  one-sided  adherence  to  the 
polemics  of  Paul  —  called  out  by  the  peculiar  con- 
ditions of  his  age  —  has  given  to  our  Protestant 
theology  a  formally  logical  aspect  which  has  often 
made  religion  too  much  a  set  of  opinions,  and  too 
little  a  life  of  fellowship  with  God.  This  tendency 
has  often  set  dogma  above  life,  and  theology  above 
religion.  It  is  certain  that  theology  and  religion  are 
inseparable,  and  that  they  react  upon  each  other ;  but 
religion  is  primary,  theology  secondary.  Theology 
is  the  intellectual  construction  of  the  realities  which 
in  religion  are  known  and  experienced.  Theology 
is  theory,  religion  is  life.  Theology  purports  to  be 
the  intellectual  equivalent — which  must  always  be 
approximate  only  —  of  the  realities  of  the  religious 
life.  The  true  method  of  thought  respecting  theology 
and  religion  is  not  to  separate  them,  but  to  assign  to 
each  of  them  its  true  function.  Our  Lord's  primary 
concern  was  religion,  —  that   men  should   love  and 


PECULIARITIES   OF  JOHN'S   THEOLOGY        19 

trust  God,  and  live  in  harmony  with  his  require- 
ments. But  these  primary  truths  of  religion  raise 
at  once  great  theological  questions :  What  is  God's 
nature  ?  What  are  his  requirements,  and  how  does 
he  make  them  known  to  us  ?  There  can  be  no 
religion  without  theology,  —  unless  religion  can  be 
divorced  from  thought,  since  theology  begins  with 
the  simplest  efforts  of  the  mind  to  construe  its  relig- 
ious ideas  and  experiences,  and  to  interpret  their 
significance,  ground,  and  end.  But  for  this  very 
reason  theology  is  secondary.  It  is  religious  thought, 
—  reflection  upon  religious  truth  and  experience, — 
and  therefore  quite  distinct  from  religious  life. 
Theology  is  to  religion  what  a  theory  of  knowledge 
is  to  our  actual  consciousness  of  ourselves  and  of 
the  objects  about  us.  No  human  being  attains  fully 
developed  reason  without  some  wonder,  inquiry,  or 
reflection  concerning  the  way  in  which  he  knows 
himself  and  the  world  ;  but  his  thought  respecting 
these  perceptions  —  be  it  ever  so  simple  or  ever  so 
profound  —  is  clearly  distinguishable  from  the  actual 
living  experience  in  which  he  knows  himself  and 
the  world. 

The  apostle  John  has  placed  in  the  foreground  of 
all  his  teaching  the  realities  of  the  religious  life, — 
God  as  love,  man  as  needy,  fellowship  with  God 
through  likeness  to  Christ  as  eternal  life.  He  had 
no  occasion  so  to  overlay  these  primal  truths  with 
arguments  that  they  should  present  themselves  to 
the  mind  primarily  as  matter  for  reasoning ;  he  pre- 


20  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

sents  tliem  rather  to  the  heart,  with  the  certainty 
that  they  will  meet  the  conscious  wants  of  mankind. 
His  teaching  summons  men,  first  of  all,  to  live  the 
sort  of  life  which  Jesus  Christ  has  revealed  and  il- 
lustrated. He  seems  to  feel  that  in  the  living  of 
that  life  lies  the  guaranty  of  essentially  right  ideas 
concerning  God  and  man  and  duty.  He  seems  will- 
ing to  trust  the  religious  life  to  give  direction  and 
shape  to  religious  thought.  He  thus  places  at  the 
centre  what  is  by  its  very  nature  central.  His 
method  of  treating  religion  —  could  it  have  had  its 
legitimate  effect  in  the  Christian  life  of  the  world  — 
would  have  tended  strongly  to  the  preservation  of 
unity  and  harmony  among  Christians.  The  divis- 
ions of  Christendom  have  arisen  mainly  from  intel- 
lectual, and  not  from  religious,  differences.  They 
have  been  differences  which  have  not,  in  the  main, 
touched  the  real  essential  unity  in  which  believers 
stand  through  their  common  fellowship  with  Christ.^ 

^  Compare  the  observations  of  E.  H.  Sears  on  this  point  in 
his  treatise  on  the  Fourth  Gospel :  "  We  cannot  move  toward 
the  Christ  without  coming  closer  to  each  other.  Leave  him 
out  and  his  unitizing  Word,  and  let  every  man  strike  out  for 
himself,  and  we  tend  to  a  crumbling  individualism,  to  endless 
distraction  and  confusion.  But  those  who  acknowledge  Jesus 
Christ  as  the  supreme  authority  and  guide,  and  enter  more 
into  his  all-revealing  mind,  ai'e  making  progress  tov/ard  the 
harmonizing  truths  which  he  represents.  However  wide  apart 
they  may  be  at  the  start,  their  progress  is  ever  on  converging 
lines.  Essential  truth  becomes  more  and  more  central  and 
manifest,  the  non-essential  falls  away  to  its  subordinate  place, 
and    orthodox  and  unorthodox   move    alike  toward  a  higher 


PECULIARITIES   OF   JOHN'S   THEOLOGY        21 

The  assertion  of  Maurice  that  those  who  fraternize 
on  any  other  basis  than  that  of  fellowship  with 
Christ  thereby  deny  the  only  true  ground  of  Christ- 
ian fellowship,  is  a  just  inference  from  John's  con- 
ception of  the  unity  of  Christendom.  This  unity  is 
real,  despite  all  the  efforts  of  men  to  destroy  it  by 
their  conflicts  of  opinion  and  theory.  It  underlies 
tlieir  differences ;  and  if  the  time  shall  ever  come 
when  Christianity  is  seen  to  be  primarily  not  a 
dogma,  but  a  life,  it  will  reassert  itself,  and  reduce 
to  insignificance  those  superficial  divisions  among 
Christians  which  different  modes  of  thought  respect- 
ing metaphysics,  polity,  and  ritual  have  created  in 
the  essentially  indivisible  Church  of  Christ.  To  the 
attainment  of  this  end  I  believe  the  teachings  and 
spirit  of  the  apostle  John  are  especially  adapted  to 
contribute. 

and  higher  unity.  It  is  not  that  any  one  sect  is  making  a  con- 
quest of  the  others,  but  Jesus  Christ  is  making  a  conquest  of 
us  all."  —  The  Heart  of  Christ,  p.  516. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  RELATION   OF   JOHN's   THEOLOGY  TO   THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT 

Literature.  —  Franke  :  Das  A  lie  Testament  bei  Johannes  , 
Wendt  :  Teaching  of  Jesus,  Attitude  toward  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  the  Johannine  discourses,  ii.  35-48  (orig.  pp.  356- 
368)  ;  Weiss  :  Der  Johannelsche  Lehrbegriff,  Zweiter  Abschnitt, 
Die  Alttestamentlichen  Gniudlagen  des  johanneischen  Lehr- 
begriffs,  especially  pp- 101-128  ;  Biblical  Theology,  The  prepara- 
tory revelation  of  God,  ii.  384-392  (§  152) ;  O.  Holtzmann  : 
Das  Johannesevangelium,  Das  Johannesevangelium  und  das 
Alte  Testament,  pp.  182-195;  Beyschlag  :  N eutestamentliche 
Theologie,  Wurdigmig  des  Alten  Testaments,  i.  229-232; 
Westcott  :  The  Gospel  of  St.  John,  Introduction,  Relation  (of 
the  Gospel)  to  the  Old  Testament,  pp.  Ixvi-lxix ;  Godet  :  Com- 
mentary,  The  Relation  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  to  the  Religion  of 
the  Old  Testament,  i.  127-134  (Am.  Ed.). 

For  the  apostle  John,  Christianity  is  the  absolute 
religion.  The  Old  Testament  system  was  preparatory 
and  provisional.  It  was,  indeed,  a  divine  system,  but 
it  was  special  in  its  nature.  Underneath  it,  and  oper- 
ating through  it,  has  ever  been  the  essential  gospel 
of  the  self-revealing  Word.  The  religion  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  a  product  of  this  self-revelation  in  its 
earlier  stages,  the  purpose  of  which  was  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  personal  manifestation  and  work  of 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    23 

the  Logos.  The  Old  Testament  religion  and  Christ- 
ianity are  one,  so  far  as  their  origin  and  aim  are 
concerned ;  they  differ  as  the  temporary  form  differs 
from  the  permanent  substance.  "  The  law  was  given 
(eSo^?;)  by  Moses;"  it  was  a  temporary,  historic 
form  which  revelation  assumed  for  a  special  purpose  ; 
but  "  grace  and  truth  "  —  the  full  and  final  revelation 
of  God's  free  love,  the  realization  of  the  heavenly 
realities  —  "came  (i'yevero)  by  Jesus  Christ"  (i.  17). 
The  two  words  by  which  the  introduction  of  the  two 
systems  is  described  suggest,  respectively,  their  differ- 
ing nature.  The  law-system  is  a  temporary  polity, 
embodying  essential  contents  of  divine  truth,  framed 
by  a  human  agent ;  it  is  introduced,  established,- 
"  given."  The  gospel  is  a  system  of  spiritual  truths 
and  principles,  or,  rather,  it  is  the  work  of  God 
revealing  himself  in  Christ,  and  through  him  recon- 
ciling the  world  unto  himself ;  it  is  personal ;  it  is 
inseparable  from  him  who  brings  it  to  the  world ;  it, 
therefore,  becomes,  transpires,  "  comes  ; "  in  the  per- 
sonal coming  of  Christ  into  humanity  came  God's 
grace  and  truth  in  their  full  manifestation. 

In  the  epistles  of  John  there  arc  no  quotations  from 
the  Old  Testament,  and  no  direct  allusions  to  it. 
Although  the  Old  Testament  is  quoted  less  frequently 
and  less  fully  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  than  in  several 
other  New  Testament  books,  the  points  of  contact 
between  it  and  the  Jewish  religion  and  scriptures 
are  numerous  and  significant.  According  to  John, 
Jesus  grounds  his  work  and  teaching  distinctly  upon 


24  THE   JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

an  Old  Testament  basis.  In  the  conversation  with  the 
Samaritan  woman,  he  identifies  himself  with  the  Jews 
in  respect  to  religion,  and  asserts  that  the  Jewish 
people  alone  have  a  right  knowledge  of  the  object  of 
worship  :  "  We  worship  that  which  we  know  "  (iv.  22). 
This  statement  he  explains  by  declaring  that  sal- 
vation proceeds  from  the  Jews ;  that  is,  that  the 
Messianic  salvation  which  he  brings  is  historically- 
grounded  in  the  religion  of  the  Jewish  people.  They 
are  the  people  of  revelation.  Their  history  has  been, 
in  a  speci,al  sense,  a  preparation  for  the  Messiah. 
Jesus,  therefore,  assumes  both  the  reality  of  Old 
Testament  revelation,  and  the  inseparable  connection 
of  his  own  work  with  that  revelation  as  its  comple- 
tion. The  same  relation  is  plainly  implied  in  the 
prologue:  "He  came  unto  his  own  (ra  c8ta),  and 
they  that  were  his  own  (ot  tStot)  received  him  not " 
(i.  11).  The  Jewish  people  as  a  whole  were  the 
true  and  proper  possession  of  Christ,  because  all 
through  their  history  God  had  been  preparing  for  his 
coming  and  work.  The  refusal,  therefore,  of  those 
who  of  right  belonged  to  him  to  accept  him,  involved 
a  great  failure  on  their  part  to  realize  the  purpose  of 
God  in  their  history. 

The  necessity  that  Old  Testament  prophecy  should 
be  fulfilled,  is  as  explicitly  asserted  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  as  it  is  in  the  First,  or  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
{cf.  XV.  25 ;  xvii.  12).  "  The  scripture  cannot  be 
broken  "  (x.  35) ;  that  is,  cannot  be  deprived  of  its 
validity.     Both  the  unity  and  the  inspiration  of  Old 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    25 

Testament  Scripture  are  pre-supposed  in  this  asser- 
tion. According  to  John,  Jesus  frequently  refers  to 
events  in  Old  Testament  history,  and  builds  in  his 
teaching  upon  their  significance.  The  lifting  up  of 
his  body  upon  the  cross,  and  its  saving  benefits,  are 
compared  to  Moses'  lifting  up  the  brazen  serpent  in 
the  wilderness  (iii.  14  ;  cf.  Num.  xxi.  8).  He  appeals 
(vi.  45)  to  the  prophetic  word :  "  And  all  thy  children 
shall  be  taught  of  the  Lord  "  (Is.  liv.  13)  —  freely  quoted 
from  the  Septuagint  —  as  describing  the  spiritual  en- 
lightenment of  the  people  in  the  Messianic  time,  and 
affirms  that  it  is  those  in  whom  this  description  is 
fulfilled  —  the  spiritually  susceptible  and  teachable  — 
who  are  accepting  him  as  the  Messiah.  Sometimes 
reference  seems  to  be  made  to  the  import  of  Old  Test- 
ament teaching  in  general  where  no  single  passage 
is  exclusively  in  mind.  Such  an  instance  is  found  in 
the  words,  "  He  that  believeth  on  me,  as  the  scrip- 
ture hath  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of 
living  water"  (vii.  38).  The  thought  of  the  passage 
is,  that  the  divine  grace  which  the  believer  receives, 
shall  not  remain  shut  up  within  him,  but  shall  com- 
municate itself  to  others.  This  communication  is 
metaphorically  described  as  the  flowing  forth  from 
him  of  a  stream  of  living  water,  and  this  result  is 
said  to  be  according  to  Old  Testament  Scripture. 
Some  have  supposed  the  reference  to  be  to  an  apocry- 
phal writing,  others  have  referred  to  the  smiting  of 
the  rock  in  the  wilderness  ;  but  the  preferable  view  is 
that  the  general  import  of  Scripture  respecting  the 


26  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

fulness  of  blessing  in  the  Messianic  age  is  here  indi- 
cated, in  view,  especially,  of  such  passages  as  employ 
the  figure  of  a  stream  or  spring  in  describing  that 
blessing  (e.  g.  Is.  xliv.  3  ;  Iv,  1 ;  Iviii.  11). 

There  are  several  instances  in  which  the  apostle 
sees  close  and  definite  relations  between  particular 
words  of  Old  Testament  prophecy  and  specific  cir- 
cumstances in  the  life  of  Jesus.  In  the  unbelief  of 
the  Jews  he  sees  fulfilled  the  words  of  Isaiah  :  "  Lord, 
who  hath  believed  our  report  ? "  (Is.  liii.  1),  where  the 
prophet  speaks  of  the  disbelief  by  the  heathen  and 
the  ungodly  of  his  description  of  Jehovah's  righteous 
servant  (xii.  38).  Again,  he  explains  (xii.  39,  40)  that 
the  Jews  could  not  believe  on  Jesus  because  Isaiah 
had  said,  "  He  [God]  hath  blinded  their  eyes,"  etc. 
(Is.  vi.  9, 10),  a  passage  in  which  the  prophet  is  bidden 
to  declare  to  his  hearers  their  incapacity  for  spiritual 
instruction,  and,  indeed, — in  accordance  with  a  pecul- 
iar Hebrew  mode  of  thought,  —  himself  to  effect  this 
result  as  Jehovah's  representative.  The  apostle  con- 
cludes :  "  These  things  said  Isaiah,  because  he  saw 
his  glory;  and  he  spake  of  him"  (xii.  41).  Our 
author,  in  accord  with  the  methods  of  interpretation 
current  in  his  age,  sometimes  applies  language  to  the 
events  of  Jesus'  ministry  or  experiences  which  in  its 
original  connection  referred  to  circumstances  of  the 
prophet's  own  time,  and  even  grounds  the  necessity 
of  the  event  upon  the  supposed  prediction  of  it.  The 
language  of  the  Psalmist,  where  he  speaks  of  his  ene- 
mies hating  him  without  a  cause  (Ps.  Ixix.  4),  must 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    27 

have  its  fulfilment,  says  the  apostle,  in  the  treatment 
which  Jesus  received  from  the  Jews  (xv.  25).  In  the 
narrative  of  the  crucifixion  are  found  several  ex- 
amples. The  soldiers  cast  lots  for  Christ's  garments 
(xix.  24)  in  order  to  fulfil  —  not  consciously,  but  in  the 
divine  purpose  —  the  words  :  "  They  parted  my  gar- 
ments among  them,  and  upon  my  vesture  did  they 
cast  lots"  (Ps.  xxii.  18),  where,  so  far  as  an  examina- 
tion of  the  psalm  itself  shows,  the  garments  were 
those  of  the  writer,  which  he  describes  as  stripped  off 
by  his  fierce  enemies.  Again,  the  legs  of  Jesus  were 
not  broken  after  the  crucifixion,  "  that  the  scripture 
might  be  fulfilled,  A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken  " 
(xix.  36).  This  language,  in  its  substance,  occurs  in 
Ex.  xii.  46  and  in  Num.  ix.  12,  where  the  method  of 
cooking  and  eating  the  paschal  lamb  is  prescribed. 
One  of  the  requirements  was  that  the  animal  must  be 
cooked  entire,  and  eaten  without  being  dismembered. 
If  this  requirement  be  here  referred  to,  then  the 
meaning  is,  that  in  the  case  of  Jesus,  who  is  the 
antitypical  paschal  lamb,  the  same  requirement  must 
find  fulfilment.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  ref- 
erence is  to  Ps.  xxxiv.  20  :  "  He  keepeth  all  his  bones : 
Not  one  of  them  is  broken,"  —  a  passage  in  which 
Jehovah's  protection  of  the  righteous  man  is  cele- 
brated. In  either  case,  it  will  be  noticed  how  definite 
is  the  relation  which  the  apostle  presupposes  between 
these  passages  and  the  particular  events  in  the  history 
of  Jesus, —  a  connection  so  definite  that  the  events 
jnust  occur  in  order  to  fulfil  the  Old  Testament  words. 


28  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

One  further  example  from  the  history  of  the  pas- 
sion may  be  noted.  In  xix.  37  the  language  of  Zecha- 
riah  (xii.  10),  "  They  shall  look  upon  me  [or  to  me] 
whom  they  have  pierced,"  is  applied  to  the  piercing 
of  Jesus'  side  by  the  spear  of  the  Roman  soldier. 
The  evangelist  departs  from  both  the  Hebrew  and  the 
Septuagint  in  substituting  the  phrase  "  on  him " 
(et?  6V)  for  "  on  [or  to]  me"  ("'?>? ;  Septuagint,  tt/jo? 
fjue),  following,  probably,  in  so  doing,  some  manuscript 
or  version  of  his  time.  The  prophetic  passage  is  a 
difficult  one,  and  Old  Testament  scholars  are  not 
agreed  either  as  to  its  translation  or  interpretatioiL 
Some  would  render :  "  They  "  (the  people  of  Jerusalem) 
"  shall  look  to  me  "  (Jehovah)  "  in  respect  to  hinj 
(i^K  nx)  whom  they  have  pierced  "  (slain) ;  that  is^ 
they  shall  turn  penitently  to  Jehovah  for  comfort 
and  forgiveness  on  account  of  their  brethren  oi 
Judah  who  were  slain  in  war  with  foreign  Gneuiies^ 
in  consequence  of  enmity  between  Jerusalem  and  the 
country  districts.^  More  commonly  the  passage  ia 
rendered  as  in  our  versions.  On  this  view  the  rela« 
tive  pronoun  in  the  passage  ("'^*<)  is  regarded  as  irj 
apposition  with  the  personal  pronoun,  and  the  prepo- 
sition  of  the  original  (nx)  is  explained  as  marking 
the  following  relative  more  plainly  as  an  accusative^ 
since  otherwise  it  might  mean,  "  who  pierced  [me]."  ^ 
The  general  sense  of  this  passage,  then,  as  commonly 
understood  is ;  In  consequence  of  the  "  spirit  of  grace 

1  So  Toy,  Quotations  in  the  Neio  Testament,  pp.  92,  93. 

2  So  Keil  and  Delitzsch,  Minor  Prophets,  in  loco. 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    29 

and  of  supplication "  which  Jehovah  will  pour  out 
'ipon  them,  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  will  regard 
him  whom  they  have  pierced  (Jehovah)  by  their  sins 
with  bitter  sorrow  and  penitent  grief.  The  apostle 
seems  to  regard  the  language  as  referring  directly  to 
the  Messiah,  and  as  literally  fulfilled  in  the  act  of 
the  Roman  soldier. 

It  is  clear  that,  in  the  case  of  the  quotations  last 
cited,  criticism  must  distinguish  between  their  orig- 
inal sense  and  application,  and  the  reference  which  is 
assigned  them  by  the  apostle.  In  accord  with  the  mode 
of  viewing  Messianic  prophecy  which  was  current 
among  the  Jews,  and  which  was  inherited  from  them 
by  the  first  Christians,  the  primary  reference  of  in- 
dividual passages  is  often  disregarded ;  and  if  the 
words  find  a  parallel  in  some  incident  in  the  history 
of  Jesus,  they  are  freely  applied  to  it,  and  even  held 
to  necessitate  that  particular  circumstance.  While 
it  is  to  be  admitted  that  the  New  Testament  writers 
often  apply  passages  without  reference  to  their  his- 
toric sense,  and  in  the  belief  that  they  primarily  re- 
lated to  the  particular  circumstances  which  are  in 
hand,  two  important  considerations  are  to  be  remem- 
bered. The  first  is  that  this  excess  —  if  I  may  so  call 
it  —  in  the  application  of  particular  passages  to  spe- 
cific events  springs  out  of  their  profound  and  true 
sense  of  the  prophetic  and  Messianic  import  of  Old 
Testament  history.  The  second  point  is  that,  while 
exegesis  cannot  always  justify  the  identification  of 
the  immediate  reference  in  quotations  with  the  situ- 


BO  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

ation  to  which  they  are  applied,  it  is  seldom  difficult 
to  discern  a  deeper  point  of  connection,  a  relation  of 
principle  between  the  two,  which  shows  that  it  is  not 
alone  the  form  of  individual  prophetic  passages  with 
which  the  writer's  mind  is  concerned,  but  that  he 
penetrates  to  the  prophetic  significance  of  Jehovah's 
relation  to  the  theocratic  people,  and  regards  that 
relation  as  the  type  of  that  which  shall  at  length  be 
constituted  between  Jehovah,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  incarnate  Redeemer  and  his  kingdom,  on  the 
other.  The  problem  which  is  involved  in  the  use 
of  Old  Testament  passages  by  the  New  Testament 
writers  can  neither  be  solved  by  making  their  appli- 
cation of  texts  give  the  law  to  Old  Testament  in- 
terpretation, nor  by  the  supposition  of  a  double  sense 
in  prophecy,  but  only  by  admitting,  on  the  one  hand, 
the  limitations  which  verbal  exegesis,  universal  in 
their  time,  imposed  upon  their  minds,  and  by  maintain- 
ing, on  the  other,  the  principle  of  typical  parallel 
ism,  —  the  view  that  the  religious  truths  and  ideals 
of  prophecy  furnish  parallels  and  illustrations  of  the 
various  stages  and  aspects  of  the  final  revelation 
of  God  in  the  person  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  discourses  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  very  ex 
plicit  in  their  recognition  of  the  Messianic  import  of 
the  Old  Testament.  In  liis  discussion  with  the  Jews, 
Jesus  takes  common  ground  with  them  so  far  as  the 
foundation  of  the  Messianic  hope  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  concerned  (v.  45-47).  You  appeal  to  Moses, 
he  says,  on  whom  you  have  set  your  hope ;  to  Moses 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    31 

you  shall  go.  If  you  did  really  believe  him,  in  the 
true  import  of  the  system  which  he  founded,  you 
would  thereby  be  led  to  accept  me  as  the  Messiah, 
"  for  he  wrote  of  me  "  (v.  46).  Here,  too,  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  general  Messianic  import  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch and  to  the  prophetic  nature  of  its  types, 
although,  possibly,  Deut.  xviii.  15  may  be  especially 
thought  of :  "  The  Lord  thy  God  will  raise  up  unto 
thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee,  of  thy  breth- 
ren, like  unto  me  ;  unto  him  ye  shall  hearken." 
What  is  of  importance,  for  our  present  purpose,  is 
that  Jesus  treats  the  teaching  of  Moses  as  so  related 
to  his  own  mission  that  a  true  belief,  involving  a 
right  spiritual  apprehension  of  what  is  taught  in  the 
Mosaic  law,  would  logically  conduce  to  an  acceptance 
of  his  Messiahship.  To  the  same  effect,  according 
to  the  most  probable  interpretation  of  the  passage, 
is  the  assertion  of  Jesus  in  v.  37 :  "  And  the  Father 
which  sent  me,  he  hath  borne  witness  of  me.  Ye 
have  neither  heard  his  voice  at  any  time,  nor  seen 
his  form."  The  witness  which  the  Father  has  borne 
to  him  is  most  naturally  understood  to  be  that  which 
is  contained  in  Sacred  Scripture,  since  in  the  next 
verse  (38)  he  refers  to  the  "  word  "  of  God,  and  es- 
pecially because  in  verse  39  he  refers  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  asserts  that  they  bear  testimony  to  himself. 
The  reference  to  the  Mosaic  books  at  the  end  of  the  dis- 
course (verses  45-47)  confirms  this  view.  The  Jews  are 
reproached,  in  language  somewhat  anthropomorphic, 
with  failure  to  hear  the  voice  of  God  which  speaks 


32  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

in  their  own  Scriptures,  and  to  see  the  form  of  God 
—  a  figurative  designation  of  his  true  nature  —  which 
is  there  disclosed.  In  the  words  that  follow,  Jesus 
repeats  the  idea,  which  is  here  presented  under  the 
figure  of  moral  deafness  and  blindness,  in  terms 
which  are  designed  to  emphasize  the  lack  on  the 
part  of  the  Jews  of  the  essential,  inward  possession 
of  the  truths  contained  in  the  Old  Testament,  which 
would,  if  dwelling  in  them,  have  disposed  them  to 
believe  on  him.^ 

In  a  way  somewhat  similar  to  that  in  which  he 
refers  to  Moses  does  he  appeal  to  Abraham  as  a  wit- 
ness to  his  Messiahship.  The  Jews  resent  his  claims 
because  they  seem  to  them  to  involve  the  absurd  idea 
that  Jesus  is  greater  than  Abraham.  Jesus  replies 
that  Abraham,  who  was  a  friend  of  the  truth,  re- 
joiced in  hope  of  seeing  (iW  i8r])  "  his  day,"  the 
realization  of  the  Messianic  ideal,  "  and  he  saw  it"  — 
in  Paradise  he  beheld  the  fulfilment  of  the  Messianic 
promise  —  "  and  was  glad"  (viii,  56).  The  exultation 
of  Abraham  in  anticipation  of  witnessing  the  appear- 
ance of  the  Messiah  and  the  joyful  realization  of  this 
hope  in  the  world  beyond,  require  the  supposition  of 
the  Messianic  significance  of  God's  covenant  with 
him  {cf.  Gen,  xv.  1-6),  and  present  a  striking  point 
of  contact  between  the  Johannine  discourses  and 
the  Old  Testament. 

The  references  of  Jesus  to  the  facts  of  Old  Testa- 
ment history  and  life  as  points  of  departure  for  his 

1  Of.  Wendt,  Teaching  oj  Jesus,  ii.  40-44  (orig.  pp.  360-365). 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    33 

own  teaching,  often  reveal  his  mode  of  viewing  the 
institutions  of  the  old  covenant.  Thus  he  speaks  of 
Moses  as  giving  the  Jews  circumcision,  but  explains 
that  the  rite  was  not  original  with  Moses,  but  was  a 
primitive  patriarchal  custom  whose  observance  Moses 
re-enacted  (vii.  22).  He  calls  the  temple  his  "  Father's 
house  "  (ii.  16),  and  by  his  indignant  expulsion  from 
it  of  those  who  profaned  it  by  buying  and  selling 
animals  for  sacrifice,  and  by  exchanging  for  profit  the 
various  kinds  of  money  which  strangers  brought  to 
the  feast,  he  reminded  the  disciples  of  the  Psalmist's 
avowal  (Ps.  Ixix.  9)  of  his  consuming  zeal  for  God's 
house  (ii.  17).  In  argument  with  the  Pharisees,  Jesus 
takes  his  stand  upon  the  maxim  of  the  law  (Deut. 
xvii.  6;  xix.  15)  that  "the  witness  of  two  men  is  true" 
(viii.  17),  and  claims  that  he  has  even  a  stronger 
attestation  for  his  Messiahship  than  this  principle 
requires.  He  has  his  own  consciousness  of  his  Mes- 
sianic calling,  and,  in  addition  to  this,  the  testimony 
of  the  Father  to  his  Messiahship.  This  testimony  is 
variously  understood  to  refer  to  the  witness  of  God 
which  is  contained  in  Scripture,  to  that  borne  by  the 
divine  voice  from  heaven,  to  the  attestation  which 
God  gave  to  Jesus  through  the  power  conferred  upon 
him  to  work  miracles,  and  to  the  sense  of  the  Father's 
approval  which  was  given  in  Jesus'  own  conscious- 
ness. In  any  case,  his  attitude  toward  the  Old 
Testament  maxim  remains  unchanged.  Our  Lord 
also  assumes  the  Old  Testament  standpoint  in  desig- 
nating the  judges  of   the  theocratic  people  as  gods 

3 


34  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

(x.  34,  35).  Ill  consideration  of  the  dignity  of  their 
stations  as  the  representatives  of  Jehovah  in  the 
nation,  the  Psahnist  addresses  them  as  gods  {°'^^^.), 
notwithstanding  their  personal  unrighteousness  (Ps. 
Ixxxii.  6  ;  cf.  xlv.  6  ;  Ex.  xxii.  28).  Tlie  argument  in 
the  passage  in  question  is,  that  if  the  judges  of  Israel, 
as  the  dispensers  of  justice  and  the  bearers  of  the 
Divine  Word,  may  be  called  Elohhn,  or  (as  in  the 
Septuagint)  Oeoi,  with  how  much  better  right  may 
he,  whom  the  Father  has  consecrated  to  a  work  far 
higher  than  theirs,  claim  the  title  "Son  of  God" 
(x.  36).i 

To  the  general  view  which  we  have  presented  of 
the  relation,  according  to  the  Johannine  discourses, 
of  Jesus  to  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  sometimes  ob- 
jected 2  that,  in  some  of  the  passages  in  question,  he 
speaks  of  the  Old  Testament  as  their  law,  as  if  he 
did  not  recognize  it  as  authoritative  :  "  In  your  law 

1  The  argument  tui'iis  on  the  superiority  of  his  dignity 
and  person  as  compared  with  those  of  the  judges  and  rulers. 
If  they  were  called  Eloliim  without  blasphemy,  surely  he  may 
be  called  "  Son  of  God  "  without  blasphemy.  It  is  very  doubt- 
ful whether  (\vith  INIeyer  and  Westcott)  we  are  to  suppose  a 
fm-ther  contrast  to  be  intended  between  their  designation 
"  gods  "  and  his  "  Son  of  God,"  on  the  view  that  he  claimed 
only  a  humbler  title  than  that  which  the  law  applied  to  them. 
In  this  case  the  argument  would  depend  upon  a  double  con- 
trast,  thus:  The  judges  and  rulers  were  called  gods;  one  who 
is  greater  than  they  may  surely  claim  the  lesser  title  "  Son  of 
God."  Most  interpreters  do  not  recognize  this  supposed  second 
contrast. 

2  For  eyample,  by  Messner,  Lehre  der  Apostel,  p.  345. 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    35 

it  is  written,  that  the  witness  of  two  men  is  true " 
(viii.  17  ;  cf.  x.  34;  xv.  25).  But  it  is  to  be  noticed 
that  Jesus  uses  this  expression,  "  your  law,"  in  an 
argumenhim  ad  Jiominem  with  tlie  Jews.  His  mode 
of  argument  is :  Your  law  upon  which  you  lay  such 
stress,  which  you  prize  as  your  chief  authority,  but 
so  inadequately  comprehend  and  apply,  is  quite  ca- 
pable of  being  turned  against  you,  and  in  my  favor. 
Your  law  requires  two  witnesses  to  prove  a  case ;  I 
furnish  them,  and  one  of  them  is  God.  Your  law 
calls  the  judges  of  Israel  gods ;  I,  who  came  forth 
from  the  Father,  have  only  claimed  the  title  Son  of 
God.  It  is  obvious  that  the  emphasis  of  these  ex- 
pressions does  not  lie  upon  the  idea  that  the  law  is 
theirs  and  in  no  sense  his,  but  upon  the  idea  that 
they,  in  their  false  view,  consider  it  theirs  in  the 
sense  that  it  is  unfavorable  to  him,  and  justifies  their 
opposition  to  him,  whereas  he  shows  how  the  re- 
verse is  the  case.  The  use  which  he  makes  of  the 
Old  Testament  passages  in  the  cases  where  he  refers 
to  them  as  "  your  law "  shows  that  he  too  builds 
upon  their  authority,  and,  so  far,  takes  common 
ground  with  the  Jews  in  respect  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  objective  way  in  which  the  gospel  con- 
stantly refers  to  "  the  Jews  "  has  been  thought  to 
indicate  a  writer  who  stood  outside  the  sphere  of 
Judaism.  But  this  peculiarity  is  naturally  accounted 
for,  partly  by  the  fact  that  the  writer,  although  a 
Jew,  had  long  resided  in  a  Roman  province,  and  had 
long  been   identified   with   Gentile  Christianity,  and 


36  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

especially  by  the  fact  that  the  Jews  are  almost  al- 
ways thus  spoken  of  as  the  determined  opponents  of 
Jesus.  It  is  not  the  writer's  relation  to  "  the  Jews," 
but  their  relation  to  Jesus,  which  his  mode  of  refer- 
ence to  them  is  intended  to  indicate. 

The  words  in  the  allegory  of  the  Door  of  the  Sheep- 
fold,  "  All  that  came  before  me  are  thieves  and  rob- 
bers" (x.  8),  have  often  been  appealed  to,  on  the 
supposition  that  they  refer  to  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
as  evidence  that  the  gospel  was  the  work  of  a  Gnostic 
of  the  second  century.  But  in  view  of  the  estimate 
elsewhere  placed  upon  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
passages  which  we  have  reviewed  (cf.  iv.  22;  v.  37,45; 
vii.  19),  it  is  impossible  to  justify  this  supposition.  The 
reference  must  be,  either  to  false  Messiahs  who  had 
claimed  to  be  "  doors  of  the  sheep,"  that  is,  teachers 
and  guides  to  the  people,^  or,  as  is  more  commonly 
held,  to  the  members  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy,  who 
had  been  increasing  their  influence  as  religious  leaders 
previous  to  the  appearance  of  Jesus  as  the  "  door " 
to  the  fold.  On  this  view  the  present  tense  — "  are 
thieves  and  robbers"  —  has  force,  as  depicting  the 
existing  antagonism  which  Jesus  is  experiencing  from 
these  would-be  leaders  of  God's  people.  In  either 
case,  the  passage  cannot  be  legitimately  used  as 
illustrating  an  anti-Judaistic  tendency  in  the  Fourth 

1  So  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  46,  47  (orig.  pp.  366,  367), 
following  many  earlier  interpreters.  The  principal  objection 
to  this  interpretation  is  that  historical  proof  of  the  appearance 
of  false  Messiahs  before  Christ's  day  is  wanting. 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    37 

Gospel,  inconsistent  with   that   found   elsewhere,  or 
inconsistent  with  the  Johannine  authorship. 

It  is  important  to  observe,  however,  that  while 
Jesus  is  at  one  with  his  contemporaries  in  recogniz- 
ing the  authority  of  the  Old  Testament,  he  often 
stands  in  sharp  contrast  with  them  in  respect  to  the 
understanding  and  application  of  it.  By  no  incident 
is  this  difference  more  clearly  illustrated  than  by  the 
discussion  which  arose  between  him  and  the  Jews 
over  the  healing  of  the  infirm  man  at  the  pool  of 
Bethesda.  The  Jews  regarded  the  action  of  Jesus  in 
curing  the  man  as  a  violation  of  the  Old  Testament 
Sabbath  law  (v.  16).  Jesus  replies,  in  substance,  that 
their  whole  idea  of  the  Sabbath  law  moves  in  the 
sphere  of  the  letter  ;  that  they  have  not  grasped  the 
conception  of  the  utility  of  the  Sabbath,  and  of  its 
subservience  to  human  well-being.  They  have  pro- 
ceeded as  if  the  rest  of  God  after  creation,  on  which 
the  law  based  tlie  sabbatic  institution,  meant  inac- 
tivity on  his  part,  and  involved  his  refraining  from 
lending  man  his  sympathy  and  aid,  and  from  actively 
promoting  his  true  interests.  On  this  false  view  was 
based  the  idea  of  the  necessity  of  man's  complete 
inactivity  on  the  Sabbath,  precluding  even  the  right 
to  relieve  human  suffering.  Jesus  affirms  that  the 
premises  on  which  their  wliole  conception  of  the 
Sabbath  rests  are  false.  God  is  intensely  active  in 
helping  and  blessing  men.  He  "  works  "  from  the 
beginning  "  even  until  now  "  (v.  17).  He  is  unceas- 
ing  and   untiring  in   his  efforts  to   promote  human 


38  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

welfare.  There  can,  therefore,  be  no  reason,  grounded 
in  the  nature  or  action  of  God,  why  works  of  benevo- 
lence should  cease  on  the  Sabbath.  In  doing  good  on 
the  Sabbath  day  Jesus  is  therefore  but  doing  "  what 
he  seeth  the  Father  doing  *'  {v.  19).  In  this  narrative 
we  find  a  stril<:ing  illustration  of  the  way  in  which 
Jesus  was  accustomed  to  correct  the  religious  and 
moral  errors  of  his  time  by  exposing  the  false  idea 
of  God  upon  which  they  rested,  and  by  substituting 
for  it  a  true  conception. 

"Whether  or  not  the  words  of  Jesus,  "  Destroy  this 
temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up  "  (ii.  19), 
should  be  cited  in  illustration  of  his  attitude  toward 
Old  Testament  institutions,  depends  in  some  degree 
upon  the  view  taken  of  John's  explanation  of  the 
words,  "  He  spake  of  the  temple  of  his  body  "  (ii.  21). 
Meyer  adopts  the  opinion  that  the  evangelist  has 
given  the  intended  meaning  of  Jesus'  words,  which 
were  designed  to  "  throw  out  a  seed  of  thought  for 
the  future  which  could  not  take  root  at  the  time." 
This  author  seeks,  however,  to  give  the  language  a 
reference  to  the  literal  temple  also,  by  supposing  that 
in  speaking  the  words  in  the  temple  court,  Jesus 
points  to  the  temple,  in  which  he  "  sees  the  sacred 
type  of  his  body  ;  "  and,  by  identifying,  without  explan- 
ation, the  type  and  the  antitype,  he  announces  "  in 
a  pictorial  riddle "  his  resurrection.^  Others  have 
recognized  more  explicitly  than  does  Meyer  a  double 
sense  in  the  words,   "  Destroy   this   temple."      The 

1  Commentary,  in  loco. 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    39 

supposition  is  made  that  by  "  this  temple  "  he  means 
the  Jews'  sacred  house,  but  that  a  reference  to  his 
resurrection  can  still  be  veiled  under  his  words,  since 
he  knows  that  it  is  in  his  own  person,  and  specifically 
by  his  death,  that  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  relig- 
ious system,  represented  in  the  temple,  will  be  con- 
summated. The  meaning  therefore  is  :  Destroy,  as 
you  are  bent  upon  doing,  your  temple  ;  overthrow, 
as  your  present  conduct  surely  will,  your  religious 
system  ;  I  will  reconstruct  it  according  to  its  true, 
divine  idea  through  my  death  and  resurrection.  On 
the  view  just  mentioned,  it  may  be  held  either  that 
Jesus  intended  the  double  sense  which  is  found  in 
his  words,  —  in  which  case  the  theory  would  be  sub- 
stantially the  same  as  Meyer's,  —  or,  that  he  directly 
referred  only  to  the  literal  temple,  but  that,  since  the 
reconstruction  predicted  was  actually  to  be  accom- 
plished by  his  resurrection,  the  evangelist's  explana- 
tion of  what  was  involved  in  his  words  is  a  just  one. 

If  it  is  once  admitted  that  the  apostle's  explanation 
of  Jesus'  words  was  derived  from  the  subsequent 
events  of  his  death  and  resurrection,  and  did  not 
rest  upon  any  clear  reference  or  exposition  of  Jesus 
at  the  time,  criticism  is  left  free  to  regard  this  explan- 
ation as  more  or  less  natural,  according  to  its  estim- 
ate of  its  appropriateness.  The  way  is  thus  opened 
to  the  theory  that  John's  interpretation  of  the  words, 
"  Destroy  this  temple,"  etc.,  is  the  result  of  his  own 
reflection,  in  the  light  of  subsequent  events,  upon 
later  teachings  of  Jesus  concerning  the  temple-wor* 


40  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

ship  and  the  abrogation  of  the  Jewish  religious  sys- 
tem through  its  fulfilment  in  the  gospel.  If  the 
definite  reference  to  "  three  days  "  seems  to  forbid 
this  supposition,  it  is  answered,  on  the  other  side, 
that  these  are  probably  the  very  words  which  gave 
rise  to  the  evangelist's  interpretation ;  and  that  while 
they  naturally  suggested  to  liis  mind,  in  the  light  of 
facts  which  occurred  afterwards,  the  idea  that  Jesus 
spoke  of  his  resurrection  after  three  days,  they  are 
really  capable  of  quite  another  interpretation.  "  Three 
days  "  is  a  proverbial  expression  for  a  short  time.  The 
prophet  Hosea,  describing  the  healing  of  the  wounds 
of  the  nation  by  Jehovah,  says  :  "  After  two  days  will 
he  revive  us :  on  the  third  day  he  will  raise  us  up,  and 
we  shall  live  before  him  "  (Hos.  vi.  2).  This  view,  it  is 
said,  accords  with  an  incident  which  is  preserved  in 
the  Synoptic  tradition  of  Jesus'  trial.  The  false  wit- 
nesses declared  :  "  We  have  heard  him  say,  I  will 
destroy  this  temple  that  is  made  with  hands,  and  in 
tbree  days  I  will  build  another  made  without  hands  " 
(Mk.  xiv.  58;  Matt.  xxvi.  61).  These  were,  indeed, 
false  witnesses,  and  the  falseness  of  their  testimony 
is  apparent  in  their  ascribing  to  Jesus  the  assertion 
that  he  would  destroy  the  temple,  whereas  he  dis- 
tinctly asserts  that  it  is  they  who  are  to  do  this 
(Xvaare^  John  ii.  19).  But  neither  this  false  state- 
ment nor  any  perversion  of  his  meaning  which  their 
testimony  may  be  naturally  supposed  to  contain,  can 
disprove  the  view  that  some  word  of  Jesus  about 
rebuilding  the  temple   in  three  days  had  been  pre- 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    41 

served  {cf.  Acts  vi.  13,  14),  In  view  of  these  consid- 
erations, and  on  account  of  the  difficulties  of  the 
"  double-sense "  theory,  many  scholars  adopt  the 
opinion  that  in  saying  that  he  would  rebuild  "  this 
temple  "  in  three  days,  Jesus  means  that  he  will  in 
the  shortest  possible  time  reconstruct  the  system  of 
worship,  which  the  Jews  are  destroying,  according 
to  its  true  idea.  This  is  the  "  sign "  which  he  will 
give,  and  which  will  show  that  he  is  the  Messiah  of 
the  nation.  They  treat  him  as  the  destroyer  of  their 
religious  institutions  ;  he  tells  them  that  it  is  they 
themselves  who  persist  in  overthrowing  their  own 
religion.  He,  on  the  contrary,  conserves  its  ideal, 
essential  doctrines,  and  will  re-establish  it  on  the 
secure  foundations  of  imperishable  spiritual  truth. 
That  which  he  will  establish  is  the  Church,  the 
spiritual  temple  of  God  ;  but  he  can  still  call  it  "  this 
temple,"  because  he  regards  his  kingdom  as  organ- 
ically connected  with  the  Jewish  theocracy,  and,  so 
far,  historically  identical  with  it.^ 

It  is  not  necessary  for  our  purpose  to  decide  con- 
fidently which  of  these  theories  is  to  be  preferred. 
I  can  only  say  of  Meyer's  view  that,  if  a  "  riddle  " 
is  to  be  found  in  the  passage,  it  seems  much  more 
natural  to  ascribe  the  making  of  it  to  the  writer  of 
the  gospel  than  to  Jesus.  On  either  of  the  other 
views  which  I  have  sketched,  the  passage  is  import- 
ant in  its  bearing  upon  the  attitude  of  Jesus  toward 

1  So  Weiss,  Life  of  Christ,  ii.  12-17.     Wendt,   Teaching   of 
Jesus,  ii.  37  (orig.  pp.  356,  357). 


42  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

the  Old  Testament.  It  illustrates  his  strong  sense 
of  the  continuity  of  divine  revelation,  culminating  in 
himself.  He  comes  to  establish  no  different  religion 
from  that  of  the  Jewish  people.  His  work  is  a  recon- 
struction of  their  demolished  temple.  The  divine 
ideal  which  the  Jewish  religion  contemplates,  can  be 
realized  only  in  his  truth  and  kingdom.  But  his 
words  illustrate,  at  the  same  time,  the  wide  separa- 
tion between  him  and  the  actual  religion  of  his  con- 
temporaries. He  must  build  what  they  are  destroying. 
He  ironically  bids  them  go  on  with  the  work  of  de- 
struction, to  which  they  are  devoted.  They  are  blind 
to  the  true  meaning  of  their  own  history,  false  to  the 
divine  ideal  which  is  contained  in  their  own  Scrip- 
tures and  embodied  in  their  institutions.  He  has 
come  to  disclose  the  real  import  and  goal  of  this 
history,  to  reveal  and  to  embody  in  himself  this  ideal ; 
but  with  his  conception  of  the  Messianic  work  they 
have  no  sympathy,  and  of  the  proofs  which  he  gives  of 
being  the  Chosen  of  God  they  have  no  appreciation. 

These  two  truths  are  brought  out  side  by  side  in 
other  narratives.  To  the  Samaritan  woman  he 
affirms  :  "  We  [Jews]  worship  that  which  we  know  : 
for  salvation  is  from  the  Jews  "  (iv.  22) ;  and,  at  the 
same  time,  he  contrasts  his  conception  of  God  as 
spirit  (iv.  24)  with  the  current  Jewish  idea  "  that  in 
Jerusalem  is  the  place  where  men  ought  to  worship  " 
(iv.  20),  as  well  as  with  the  tenet  of  the  Samaritans. 
The  import  of  his  teaching  is :  The  Jewish  people 
have,  indeed,  preserved  the  true  idea  of  God  as  com- 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    43 

pared  with  that  of  other  peoples,  but  this  idea  has 
been  greatly  lowered  and  narrowed.  The  Jewish 
people  know  the  true  God,  but  they  do  not  know  him 
adequately.  Their  conception  must  be  greatly  ele- 
vated and  ennobled  before  it  can  be  the  basis  of  a 
true  spiritual  worship.  To  bring  this  fuller  knowl- 
edge, I  am  come.  The  hour  has  already  arrived 
(verse  23)  for  worthier  thoughts  of  God  and  of  his 
worship  than  those  which  prevail  even  among  the 
chosen  people. 

In  no  passage  is  the  independence  of  Jesus,  and  his 
elevation  above  the  religious  life  and  scriptural  knowl- 
edge of  his  contemporaries,  more  forcibly  presented 
than  in  the  words  :  "  Ye  search  the  scriptures  be- 
cause ye  think  that  in  them  ye  have  eternal  life  ;  and 
these  are  they  which  bear  witness  of  me ;  and  ye  will 
not  come  to  me,  that  ye  may  have  life  "  (v.  39,  40). 
It  appears  to  me  certain  that  the  Revised  Version  has 
rightly  rendered  ipawdre  (verse  39)  as  indicative, 
"  ye  search,"  instead  of  as  an  imperative,  as  our 
older  version  renders,  "  search."  The  surrounding 
verbs  in  the  context  are  indicative  {ouk  e^ere,  verse  38  ; 
ov  deXere,  verse  40)  ;  the  causal  clause  which  follows, 
" because  ye  think"  etc.,  gives  a  natural  reason  for 
the  fact  that  they  search  the  Scriptures,  but  not  for 
an  exhortation  to  them  to  search  them ;  and  the  drift 
of  the  passage  as  a  whole  shows  that  Jesus  is  rebuk- 
ing their  profitless  study  of  Scripture.  They  search 
the  writings  (ra?  jpa4>d^),  but  in  a  manner  so  super- 
ficial and  prejudiced,  and  with  so  little  discernment 


44  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  their  import,  that  they  do  not  find  God's  true  word 
(^Tov  \6<yov  avTov,  verse  38)  therein.  Jesus  certainly 
does  not  mean,  in  so  speaking,  to  place  a  light  esti- 
mate upon  the  study  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures, 
or  to  intimate  that  the  way  of  eternal  life  may  not 
be  found  in  them,  but  only  to  assert  that  their  study 
as  conducted  by  his  Jewish  opponents  cannot  yield 
this  result,  and  especially  to  affirm  that  a  true  under- 
standing of  Sacred  Scripture  would  conduct  to  the 
acceptance  of  himself  as  the  Messiah.  In  saying, 
"  These  are  they  which  bear  witness  of  me  "  (verse  39), 
he  shows  that  his  work  stands  in  inseparable  connec- 
tion with  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  he  attaches 
the  highest  importance  to  its  authentication  of  his 
mission.  Jesus  does  not,  therefore,  rebuke  the  Jewish 
zeal  for  the  Scriptures,  in  itself  considered,  but  he 
deprecates  the  narrowness,  selfishness,  and  blindness 
of  mind  which  have  misdirected  that  zeal,  turned 
it  into  a  superficial  adherence  to  the  letter,  and 
subjected  the  language  of  Scripture  to  strained 
and  unnatural  interpretation  in  support  of  current 
traditions. 

That  which  is  most  striking  and  important  in  the 
attitude  of  Jesus  toward  the  Old  Testament,  as  rep- 
resented in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  is  the  confidence  with 
which  he  asserts  —  as  against  the  Messianic  ideas  of 
his  time  —  the  correspondence  of  his  person  and  work 
to  the  prophetic  ideal.  He  brushes  aside  the  super- 
ficial verbal  exegesis  of  his  contemporaries,  which 
found  in  the  Messiah  of  the  prophets  only  a  second 


JOHN'S  THEOLOGY  AND  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT    45 

David  who  should  subdue  Israel's  enemies  and  rule 
the  nation  in  power  and  pomp,  and  asserts  that  such 
is  not  the  real  prophetic  ideal  of  Messiah's  character 
and  work.  The  Messiah  in  whom  that  ideal  is  real- 
ized, and  who  can  accomplish  that  moral  renewal  and 
bestow  that  spiritual  life  for  lack  of  which  the  nation 
is  perishing,  belongs  to  a  higher  order,  —  the  order  of 
the  spirit  and  of  holiness.  That  true  Messiah  is  him- 
self. Whether  the  Jewish  people  will  receive  him  or 
not,  is  for  them  the  question  of  destiny. 


CHAPTER   III 

THE    IDEA    OF    GOD    IN    THE   WRITINGS    OP    JOHN 

Literature.  —  Beyschlag  :  Neatest.  TheoL,  Die  Gottesidee, 
i.  220, 221 ;  Wendt  :  Teaching  of  Jesus,  Couception  of  God  in  the 
Johannine  Discourses,  i.  203-206  (orig.  pp.  154-157)  ;  AVeiss  : 
Johann.  Lehrh.,  Der  BegrifE  der  Erkenntniss  Gottes,  pp.  11-18 ; 
Reuss:  Hist.  Christ.  TheoL,  Of  the  Essential  Nature  of  God,  ii. 
383-388  (orig.  pp.  428-435);  Lechler  :  Apostolic  and  Post- 
Apostolic  Times,  Of  God,  ii.  181-183  (orig.  pp.  458-461) ;  Baur: 
Neutest.  TheoL,  Das  AVesen  Gottes  als  reine  Geistigkeit  und  als 
absolute  Thatigkeit,  pp.  354-356  ;  Lias  :  Doctrinal  System  of  St. 
John,  The  Nature  and  Attributes  of  God,  pp.  16-32 ;  Westcott  : 
The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  The  Fatherhood  of  God,  pp.  27-34  j  St. 
John's  Conception  of  Love,  pp.  130-133;  Kostlin  :  Johann. 
Lehrb.,  Lehre  von  Gott,  73-113. 

The  study  of  the  idea  of  God  as  presented  in  the 
writings  of  John  should  proceed  from  that  word  of 
Jesus  to  the  Samaritan  woman :  "  God  is  spirit "  (iv. 
24).  Both  our  English  versions  here  render  7rvev/xa  "a 
spirit " ;  but  the  sense  which  is  given  by  the  trans- 
lation "God  is  a  spirit"  is  less  appropriate,  since 
the  context  shows  that  it  is  not  the  personality  but 
the  nature  of  God  which  the  words  are  intended  to 
describe.  In  contrast  to  the  inadequate  idea  of  the 
Samaritans,  and  even  to  the  current  popular  notion 
of  the  Jews,  that  God  must  be  worshipped   in  one 


THE  IDEA   OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      47 

particular  place,  as  if  his  presence  were  local,  Jesus 
sets  his  thought  that  God  may  be  truly  worshipped 
anywhere.  As  spirit,  he  is  above  all  limitations  of 
time  and  space.  The  conditions  of  ti'ue  worship  are, 
that  it  shall  be  rendered  "in  spirit," — that  is,  that 
the  highest  affections  of  the  worshipper  shall  be  conse- 
crated to  God,  —  and  that  it  shall  be  "  in  truth,"  — 
that  is,  shall  proceed  from  a  true  and  worthy  idea  of 
the  divine  nature.  Moreover,  it  accords  better  with 
a  mode  of  thought  frequently  found  in  John's  writ- 
ings to  understand  Trvevfia  6  de6<i  as  a  generic  de- 
scription of  the  divine  nature.  Analogous  expressions 
are:  "God  is  light"  (I.  i.  5)  and  "God  is  love" 
(I,  iv.  8).  The  statements  of  verse  23  as  to  the 
nature  and  conditions  of  true  worship,  accord  best 
with  the  idea  that,  in  tlie  sentence  under  considera- 
tion, Jesus  is  presenting  the  true  idea  of  the  spiritual 
nature  of  God  which  a  genuine  worship,  proceeding 
from  the  heart,  presupposes  and  requires.  The  ar- 
gument therefore  is  :  The  genuine  worshippers  —  as 
opposed  to  those  who  suppose  that  God  must  be 
worshipped  on  Mount  Gerizim  or  in  Jerusalem  — 
will  render  him  a  purely  spiritual  service,  a  service 
which  alone  accords  with  what  he  is,  for  his  nature 
is  spiritual.  It  should  also  be  noticed  that  the  em- 
phatic position  of  Trvevixa  in  the  sentence  shows 
that  this  word  is  the  pivot  of  the  whole  argument, 
and  accords  perfectly  with  the  interpretation  of  its 
meaning  which  we  have  given. 

This  passage  presents  the  most  abstract  and  generic 


48  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

idea  of  God  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  Johanniue 
writings.  God  is,  in  his  essence,  spirit.  He  is  not  re- 
stricted in  respect  to  the  time  or  place  of  his  manifest- 
ation. There  is  no  time  when  the  sincere  worshipper 
may  not  find  him  ;  there  is  no  place  where  he  will  not 
manifest  himself  to  the  trustful  and  obedient  heart. 
This  idea  of  the  spirituality  of  God  is  not,  as  is  some- 
times supposed,  placed  in  contrast  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment idea  of  God,  for  there  we  meet  with  the  view  — 
most  impressively  presented  —  that  God  is  not  lim- 
ited to  earthly  dwelling-places,  nor  even  to  the  high- 
est heavens  (1  Kings,  viii.  27).  Nor  is  the  idea  of 
Jesus  opposed  to  the  Samaritan  theology  as  such; 
but  it  stands  in  contrast  to  the  practically  imperfect 
apprehension  of  God's  transcendence  and  omnipres- 
ence which  was  implied  in  such  questions  as  that  of 
the  Samaritan  woman  as  to  where  men  ought  to 
worship.  The  statement  of  Jesus,  "  God  is  spirit," 
communicated  no  new  conception  of  the  divine  na- 
ture ;  it  only  gave  strong,  fresh  emphasis  to  a  truth 
which  was  very  inadequately  apprehended  and  ap- 
plied in  religious  thought  and  life,  and  furnished  a 
basis  for  showing  how  essential  is  a  true  idea  of  God 
to  a  worship  which  shall  be  at  once  rational  and 
sincere. 

Closely  connected  with  the  conception  of  God  as 
spirit  stands  the  idea  that  he  is  invisible.  "  No  man 
hath  seen  God  at  any  time  "  (i.  18).  He  reveals  him- 
self to  men  not  by  making  to  their  senses  an  Immed- 
iate presentation  of  himself,  but  by  manifesting  his 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN       49 

will  and  nature  to  them  in  the  person  of  the  only 
begotten  Son,  who  ever  stands  in  most  intimate 
fellowship  with  himself,  and  who  therefore  has  an 
immediate  intuition  of  the  mind  of  the  Father.  This 
Son,  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  liath  declared 
God  to  men  (i.  18).  It  is  obvious  that  in  this  pas- 
sage the  contrast  is  drawn  between  God  as  hidden  to 
the  senses  of  man  and  as  revealed  in  his  grace  and 
truth  through  Jesus  Christ.  In  I.  iv.  12,  where  God 
is  spoken  of  as  invisible  and  yet  as  dwelling  in  men, 
the  idea  is  that,  although  he  cannot  be  discerned  by 
the  senses  or  known  by  the  natural  understanding 
of  man,  he  reveals  himself  as  love  to  those  who 
themselves  have  the  disposition  of  love,  and  who 
therefore  have  an  affinity  of  life  with  him.  In  so 
far  as  man  is  morally  like  God,  is  he  capable  of  re- 
ceiving the  knowledge  of  God.  "  If  we  love  one 
another,  God  abideth  in  us,  and  his  love  is  perfected 
in  us"  (I.  iv.  12). 

Both  the  ways  in  which  the  invisible  God  is  thus 
said  to  reveal  himself  stand  directly  connected  with 
the  conception  of  God  as  spirit.  As  spirit  he  reveals 
himself  to  the  senses  of  men  only  mediately  through 
the  incarnation  of  the  Son,  who  so  perfectly  em- 
bodies in  his  own  person  the  Father's  will  and  na- 
ture that  he  can  say,  "  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath 
seen  the  Father"  (xiv.  9).  So  also  does  the  other 
form  of  revelation  by  which  the  invisible  God  be- 
comes known  accord  with  the  divine  nature  as  spirit. 
God  reveals  himself  as  love  to  the  inner  life  of  man, 

4 


50  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

where  the  conditions  of  a  spiritual  apprehension  of 
him  are  fulfilled.  Since  God  is  a  spiritual  being,  he 
can  only  reveal  himself  to  man  as  a  spiritual  being, 
and  upon  the  fulfilment  of  spiritual  conditions.  As 
spirit,  God  is  apprehended  by  man  only  by  the  devel- 
opment of  a  capacity  for  what  is  spiritual.  Thus,  the 
very  nature  of  God  as  spirit  determines  the  method 
and  conditions  of  his  direct  manifestations  of  himself 
to  the  soul.  Only  through  moral  likeness  to  him- 
self can  God  be  truly  apprehended  and  known. 

The  words  recorded  in  v:  37,  "  Ye  have  neither 
heard  his  voice  at  any  time,  nor  seen  his  form,"  seem, 
when  taken  by  themselves,  to  be  a  denial  of  the  pos- 
sibility that  God  can  be  perceived  by  the  senses.  The 
context,  however,  makes  it  apparent  that  this  is  not 
their  purpose.  The  words  are  intended  to  assert 
that  the  Jews  by  reason  of  their  moral  obduracy  and 
spiritual  blindness  have  failed  to  apprehend  those 
revelations  of  God  which  he  has  made  in  their  own 
history.  The  assertion  which  immediately  follows 
(v.  38),  "  And  ye  have  not  his  word  abiding  in  you," 
makes  it  clear  that  the  sentence  just  referred  to  is  a 
rebuke  of  their  insusceptibility.  They  have  not  heard 
in  any  such  way  as  to  appreciate  the  voice  of  God, 
which  has  spoken  to  them  through  their  own  prophets, 
nor  seen  God's  self-manifestation,  which  he  has  made 
in  their  own  Scriptures,  which  they  search  to  so  little 
purpose  (v.  39). 

The  spiritual,  invisible  God  is  presented  in  the 
writings  of  John  as  "  the  true  God  "  (6  d\r]Ocvb<;  Oeo^, 


THE  IDEA   OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      51 

I.  V.  20),  the  One  who  in  reality  corresponds  perfectly 
to  the  idea  of  God.  All  other  so-called  gods  are  but 
idols ;  the  God  who  is  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ  is 
God  alone.  Hence  he  is  called  "  the  only  God  "  (o 
lx6vo<i  de6<i,  V.  44)  ;  and,  again,  eternal  life  is  defined 
as  consisting  in  the  knowledge  of  the  only  true  God 
(jov  jjiovov  oXtjOlvov  6e6v,  xvii.  3),  and  of  him  whom 
God  did  send,  Jesus  Christ.  The  Johannine  doctrine 
of  God,  so  far  as  we  have  traced  it,  may  be  summed 
up  in  the  statement  that  in  contrast  to  all  anthropo- 
morphic ideas  of  God  he  is  presented  in  these  writ- 
ings as  the  invisible,  absolute  vSpirit,  and  in  contrast 
to  all  polytheistic  conceptions  he  is  affirmed  to  be 
the  one  and  only  Being  who  corresponds  to  the  true 
idea  of  Deity. 

The  terms  which  have  thus  far  been  considered, 
especially  the  definition  of  God  as  spirit,  are  chiefly 
descriptive  of  those  divine  attributes  which  in  theol- 
ogy are  called  immanent.  These  attributes  represent 
qualities  which  belong  to  the  metaphysical  nature  of 
the  Deity.  They  are  intended  to  describe  what  God 
is  in  himself.  But  God  is  not  presented  to  us  in  the 
Johannine  writings  in  this  aspect  of  his  being  alone. 
He  is  not  thought  of  as  self-contained,  or  as  dwelling 
within  himself  in  separation  from  the  world  and  man. 
On  the  contraiy,  the  main  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the 
relations  which  God  sustains  to  his  creatures,  and 
upon  the  way  in  which  he  manifests  himself  to  them 
in  mercy  and  love.  Speaking  in  the  language  of 
theology,  we  should  say  that  the  writings  of  John 


52  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

dwell  most  upon  those  attributes  of  God  which  are 
called  ethical  or  transitive.  As  we  found  that  the 
statement  "  God  is  spirit "  formulated  more  pre- 
cisely than  any  other  the  conception  of  what  God 
in  his  metaphysical  nature  is,  so  we  shall  find  that 
the  Johannine  idea  of  God's  moral  nature — of  his 
disposition  and  mode  of  action  toward  his  creatures  — 
is  best  summed  up  in  the  words,  "  God  is  love " 
(I.  iv.  8,  16). 

This  proposition  in  both  places  where  it  occurs  in 
the  First  Epistle,  has  a  practical  and  not  a  dogmatic 
purpose.  John  exhorts  his  readers  to  love  one  an- 
other, on  the  ground  that  love  is  of  God,  that  is,  has 
its  seat  or  dwelling-place  in  the  being  of  God  (I.  iv.  7). 
He  whose  life  is  ruled  by  tliis  divine  principle  is  born 
of  God,  and  knows  God.  He  has  received  from  God 
a  divine  impartation  of  spiritual  life,  and  has  entered 
into  that  fellowship  with  God  which  his  likeness  to 
God  makes  possible.  Conversely,  he  who  does  not 
love  cannot  be  in  fellowship  with  God,  for  "  God  is 
love  "  (I.  iv.  8).  Better  than  any  other  single  word  love 
describes  God's  moral  nature  in  its  forth-putting  of 
interest  and  sympathy  toward  his  creatures.  It  desig- 
nates God  as  existing  and  acting  in  relations.  It 
implies  not  only  the  existence  of  an  object  of  love, 
but  the  idea  of  a  self-impartation  to  that  object.  Love 
is,  in  its  very  nature,  the  disposition  to  impart  bless- 
ing to  its  object. 

Love  implies  the  existence  of  goodness  in  the  sub- 
ject of  it  and  the  impartation  of  good  to  its  object. 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN     53 

The  statement  of  the  apostle,  therefore,  means  much 
more  than  that  God  has  love.  He  is  love,  that  is,  he 
is  the  absolutely  good  Being,  for  love  is  the  essence  of 
goodness.  Love,  the  impulse  to  bless  and  to  impart 
his  own  goodness,  makes  him  what  he  is.  Were  he 
less  than  perfect  love  at  any  moment  or  in  any  de- 
gree, he  would  not  be  God.  Love  is  a  name  for  his 
moral  perfection.  In  other  words,  the  assertion  of 
the  apostle  indicates  that  love  is  not  a  mere  temper 
or  inclination  which  it  is  optional  with  God  to  exer- 
cise or  not  to  exercise  toward  the  beings  whom  he 
has  made.  It  is  absolutely  essential  and  constituent 
in  God's  being.  Love  is  not  a  mere  determination  of 
the  divine  will,  as  if  it  were  said  that  God  were  full 
of  love  ;  it  is  a  name  for  his  ethical  nature  in  its 
essential  and  changeless  character.  The  affirmation 
of  the  apostle  appears  to  me  to  exclude  the  position  of 
some  theologians,  that  God  may  at  will  suspend  the 
operation  of  his  love.*  To  do  this  would  be,  in  the 
apostle's  use  of  terms,  to  relinquish  moral  perfection, 
to  cease  to  exercise  toward  his  creatures  those  feel- 
ings of  interest  and  sympathy  which  are  fundamental 
in  the  ethical  character  of  God.     If  love  is  held  to  be 

1  Cf.,e.g.,  Strong,  Philosophy  and  Religion,  p.  196  :  "  Love  is 
an  attribute  which,  like  omnipotence,  God  may  exercise  or  not 
exercise,  as  he  will." 

Shedd,  Theological  Essays,  p.  285  :  "  We  can  say,  '  God  may 
be  merciful  or  not,  as  he  pleases,' "  etc. 

Patton,  Princeton  Review,  Jan.  1878  :  "  God  is  bound  to  be 
just ;  he  is  not  bound  to  be  generous.  The  measure  of  God's 
benevolence  is  a  matter  of  option." 


54  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

an  optional  quality  of  God's  action,  it  must  be  much 
more  narrowly  defined  than  John  has  conceived  it. 
It  must  be  understood  not  in  the  sense  of  universal 
benevolence,  the  exercise  of  which  God  cannot  be  con 
ceived  as  withholding  without  impairing  the  very  idea 
of  God,  but  in  the  narrow  sense  of  complaisance  or 
favor,  —  terms  which  denote  feelings  whose  exercise 
is  conditioned  upon  the  attitude  of  God's  creatures 
toward  him.  The  position  that  God  ever  does  or 
ever  could  cease  to  be  generous,  merciful,  and  loving 
is  a  perilous  admission  for  theology,  involving,  as  it 
does,  the  alternative  that  either  naked  justice  alone 
is  essential  to  moral  perfection,  or  that  God  can  be 
conceived  as  choosing  to  become  something  less  than 
perfect.  Neither  of  these  positions  seems  to  me  to 
be  reconcilable  with  the  teaching  of  John.  In  the 
effort  which  theology  has  often  made  to  enthrone 
justice  as  the  one  essential  and  necessary  attribute  of 
God,i  it  is  compelled  to  ground  the  remaining  attri- 
butes in  his  will  alone.  This  view  involves  the  denial 
that  all  God's  perfections  are  grounded  in  his  essence, 
and  confuses  the  idea  of  his  ethical  completeness  by 
assigning  a  different  basis  to  justice  from  that  which 
is  assigned  to  other  attributes.  We  shall  recur  to 
this  subject  in  a  later  chapter. 

As  in  the  passage  just  considered  (I.  iv.  8)  the  affirm- 

1  Cf.  Shedd,  op.  cit.,  p.  285  :  "  Whatever  else  God  may  be  or 
may  not  be,  he  must  be  just.  It  is  not  optional  with  him  to 
exercise  this  attribute  or  not  to  exercise  it,  as  it  is  in  the  in- 
stance of  that  class  of  attributes  which  are  antithetic  to  it." 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      55 

ation  "  God  is  love  "  is  made  the  ground  of  the  negative 
statement  that  only  he  that  loveth  can  be  begotten* 
of  God,  so  in  the  second  passage  (I.  iv,  16)  the  same 
statement  is  made  the  support  of  the  corresponding 
positive  assertion  that  "  He  that  abideth  in  love 
abideth  in  God,  and  God  abideth  in  him."  Since 
God's  nature  is  love,  he  who  loves  has  entered  into 
fellowship  with  God,  and  abides  in  him. 

This  most  general  statement  concerning  God's 
nature  as  love  is  illustrated  by  several  concrete 
examples.  Three  objects  of  the  love  of  God  are 
specified.  The  first  of  these  is  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ : 
"The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all 
things  into  his  hand  "  (iii.  35).  Similarly  in  xvii.  24 
Jesus  speaks  of  the  Father  as  loving  him  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world.  This  love  of  the 
Father  for  the  Son  is  treated,  in  the  connection,  as  a 
type  of  the  love  which  God  bestows  upon  Christ's 
disciples. 

Again,  when  Jesus  has  occasion  to  defend  himself 
against  the  objections  of  the  Jews  on  the  ground  that 
he  did  works  of  healing  on  the  Sabbath,  he  urges  that 
in  so  doing  he  is  but  working  along  the  lines  of  the 
Father's  activity  :  "  My  Father  worketh  even  until 
now,  and  I  work"  (v.  17).  "For,"  he  continues, 
"the  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  showeth  him  all 
things  that  himself  doeth  "  (v.  20).  Again,  the  love 
of  the  Father  to  the  Son  is  grounded  upon  the  will- 
ingness of  the  Son  to  lay  down  his  life  for  the  world : 


56  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

"  Therefore  doth  the  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay 
down  my  life,  that  I  may  take  it  again"  (x.  17). 
Jesus  also  makes  the  love  of  the  Father  to  himself 
tlie  type  and  measure  of  his  own  love  to  his  disciples : 
"  Even  as  the  Father  hath  loved  me,  I  also  have  loved 
you  "  (xv.  9). 

The  love  of  God  is  most  fully  illustrated  in  the 
Gospel  of  John  by  this  love  of  the  Father  to  the  Son. 
The  language  of  the  apostle  which  describes  it  pre- 
supposes the  existence  between  Jesus  and  the  Father 
of  a  unique,  pretemporal  relation.  With  good  reason, 
therefore,  has  theology  appealed  to  these  passages  as 
illustrating  the  idea  that  love  must  find  within  the 
divine  Being  himself  an  eternal  object  for  its  exer- 
cise. If  God  is  the  absolute  Being,  and  the  universe 
is  not  eternal  but  dependent  upon  his  will,  then  must 
the  essential  nature  of  God  as  love  find  its  object  and 
exercise  within  God  himself.  This  could  not  be  the 
case  if  God  were  absolutely  solitary ;  on  the  other 
hand,  the  conception  of  love  requires  the  view  that 
there  is  within  his  essence  some  kind  of  a  manifold- 
ness  and  intercommunion  of  life.  The  very  nature 
of  love  as  the  outgoing,  self-imparting  impulse  in 
God,  suggests,  and  even  seems  to  require,  some  con- 
ception of  the  divine  Being  which  includes  the  idea 
of  the  interrelation  of  subject  and  object.  Many 
theologians,  therefore,  from  Augustine  onward,  have 
sought  to  deduce  the  concept  of  the  Trinity  from  the 
nature  of  God  as  love,  or,  at  least,  to  illustrate  from 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      57 

the  idea  of  love  the  necessity  of  a  Trinitarian  concep- 
tion of  the  divine  nature.^ 

The  second  object  of  the  divine  love  which  the 
apostle  mentions  is  the  world  :  "  God  so  loved  the 
world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,"  etc.  (iii.  16), 
and  in  the  First  Epistle  John  refers  to  the  divine  love 
as  shown  by  the  fact  that  God  has  made  him  and  his 
readers  "  children  of  God  "  (iii.  1).  The  love  of  God 
to  undeserving  men  is  the  basis  of  salvation.  This 
love  antedates  and  underlies  all  human  love.  The 
love  of  God  for  men  was  the  motive  which  prompted 
the  sending  of  Christ  to  save  them,  and  this  love 
should  both  quicken  our  gratitude  to  God  and  beget 
in  us  a  corresponding  love  to  one  another  (I.  iv.  9-11). 
The  love  of  Christians  for  one  another  has  its  ground 
and  spring  in  the  love  of  God  to  men.  It  is  because 
God's  nature  is  love,  and  because  he  makes  men  the 
sharers  of  his  spirit,  that  men  are  impelled  to  love 
God  and  their  brethren.      Love  among  men  is  the 

1  Cf.  Sartorius,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Divine  Love,  p.  8,  sq.  It  is 
obvious  that  this  line  of  argument  is  greatly  weakened  by  that 
type  of  theological  thought  to  which  we  have  adverted,  which 
grounds  love  in  the  divine  will,  and  makes  it  a  disposition  subject 
to  the  divine  choice.  The  essentialness  and  centrality  of  love 
in  God  are  justly  insisted  upon  by  Sartorius  as  the  presupposi- 
tion of  his  whole  argument  in  deducing  the  notion  of  the  Trinity 
from  the  idea  of  love.  "  The  attributes  of  the  divine  nature," 
he  says,  "  are  explained  and  combined  in  too  poor  and  human  a 
relation  of  reflection,  if  they  are  not  perceived  to  be  one  in  all- 
comprehending  love,  which,  as  free  as  necessary  in  its  action, 
is  not  so  much  an  attribute  which  God  has,  as  the  nature  which 
he  is ;  for  God  is  love."     Op.  cit.  p.  8. 


58        THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

answering  echo  of  the  love  of  God  for  them.  "  We 
love,  because  he  first  loved  us  "  (I.  iv.  19). 

In  the  third  place,  believers  are  said  to  be  the 
objects  of  God's  love.  This  idea  is  presented  in  the 
passage  already  alluded  to  (xvii.  23),  where  a  parallel 
is  drawn  between  the  love  which  the  Father  has  for 
the  Son  and  that  which  he  has  for  the  disciples  of 
Jesus.  The  passages  which  describe  God's  love  to 
men  justify  the  theological  distinction  that,  while 
God  loves  all  men  with  the  love  of  benevolence,  he 
loves  only  the  trustful  and  obedient  with  the  love  of 
complacency.  In  the  former  sense  the  world  is  the 
object  of  God's  love ;  yet  Jesus  says,  "  If  a  man  love 
me,  he  will  keep  my  word :  and  my  Father  will  love 
him,"  etc.  (xiv.  23),  —  meaning,  of  course,  with  the 
love  of  approval,  as  is  shown  by  the  assurance  that 
with  such  both  he  and  the  Father  will  make  their 
abode  (ib.).  Elsewhere  the  love  of  God  for  the  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus  is  grounded  upon  their  love  to  their 
Master  and  their  acceptance  of  him  as  the  Messiah  : 
"  The  Father  himself  loveth  you,  because  ye  have 
loved  me,  and  have  believed  that  I  came  forth  from 
the  Father"  (xvi.  27).  This  love  of  the  Father  for 
believers  can  only  be  that  closer  sympathy  and  fel- 
lowship which  faith  makes  possible,  and  which  cannot 
exist  where  love  is  not  appreciated  and  reciprocated. 

Such  are  the  elements  of  the  teaching  respecting 
the  divine  love  in  the  writings  of  John.  God  is  pre- 
sented in  this  teaching  as  the  great  Giver.  In  his 
love  is  grounded  the  gift  of  his  Son  for  the  world's 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      59 

salvation,  and  all  the  gifts  of  grace  with  which  he  has 
blessed  the  world  through  him.  According  to  this 
teaching  God  is  near  to  ns.  His  transcendence  is, 
indeed,  affirmed  and  emphasized,  but  it  is  an  ethical 
transcendence  which  is  grounded  in  his  holiness.  It 
is  not  a  transcendence  which  implies  remoteness  or 
absence  from  the  world ;  nor  is  it  founded  upon  the 
idea  of  a  purely  legal  relation  between  God  and  man, 
which  requires  man  to  approacli  God  through  sacred 
rites  and  meritorious  works.  The  theology  of  John 
represents  God  as  accessible  to  every  loving  and 
obedient  heart.  Man  may  enter  into  fellowship  of 
life  with  God  on  conditions  which  are  simple  and 
purely  spiritual. 

Nor  is  God  merely  accessible.  Love,  which  is  the 
essence  of  his  ethical  nature,  is  an  active,  energetic, 
self-revealing  principle.  God  constantly  seeks  to 
make  men  the  recipients  of  influences  of  grace  and 
blessing.  The  divine  love  is  always  pouring  itself 
forth  upon  the  world,  and  is  the  perpetual  motive  and 
inspiration  of  all  the  impulses  of  religion  in  man. 

There  are  several  forms  in  which,  in  the  writings 
of  John,  this  self-revealing  impulse  of  God's  nature 
is  emphasized.  The  most  general  of  these  is  that  in 
which  God  is  depicted  as  the  Source  and  Giver  of 
life  to  men  :  "  As  the  Father  hath  life  in  himself, 
even  so  gave  he  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself " 
(v.  26).  Many  theologians  have  understood  this  giv- 
ing of  life  to  the  Son  as  referring  to  his  "  eternal 
generation  "  from  the  Father ;  but  the  context  shows 


60  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

decisively  that  the  reference  is  to  the  spiritual  or 
eternal  life  which  is  imparted  to  believers.  The 
whole  passage  (v.  19-27)  is  best  regarded  as  a  de- 
scription of  the  life-giving  work  of  Jesus,  in  which  it 
is  shown  that  this  work  is  grounded  in  the  purpose 
and  nature  of  God.  The  quickening  of  the  spiritu- 
ally dead  (verse  25)  is  wrought  by  Christ,  because 
when  the  Father  sent  him  into  the  world  he  gave 
him  (note  the  aorist,  ehwKev)  the  right  and  power  to 
communicate  divine  life,  or  salvation,  to  men.  It  is 
according  to  the  nature  of  God  as  the  absolutely  liv- 
ing One  (6  l^oiv  7raT7]p,  vi.  57)  to  bestow  life.  God 
imparts  this  spiritual  life  to  the  world  through  the 
Son,  who,  by  reason  of  his  unique  and  essential  rela- 
tion to  the  Father,  is  said  to  live  "  because  of  the 
Father  "  (Sm  rov  irarepa,  vi.  57),  that  is,  because  the 
Father  is  the  absolute  Source  of  life.  We  may  note  in 
passing  that  while  these  passages  do  not  refer  to  what 
is  called  the  "  eternal  generation  "  of  the  Son,  they  do 
imply  both  a  pretemporal  existence  of  the  Son  and  a 
metaphysical  union  of  the  Son  with  the  Father. 

The  representation  of  God  as  light  (I.  i.  5)  is  espec- 
ially significant  in  this  connection.  Haupt  defines 
the  distinction  between  the  idea  of  God  as  light  and 
the  idea  of  him  as  love  to  be  that  the  former  desig- 
nates the  metaphysical  being  of  God,  —  the  totality  of 
the  divine  perfections,  —  while  the  latter  designates 
his  ethical  activity.  "  The  former  is  the  immanent, 
the  latter  the  transitive,  side  of  the  divine  nature.''  ^ 
1  Commentary,  on  1  John  iv.  8. 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  AVRITINGS  OF  JOHN      61 

It  is  very  doubtful  whether  this  distinction  can  be 
strictly  applied.  The  figure  of  light,  both  in  itself 
and  in  its  use,  is  especially  adapted  to  define  the 
principle  or  impulse  of  self-revelation  and  self-irapart- 
ation  in  God.  In  the  First  Epistle  light  is  little 
more  than  a  figurative  designation  for  life,  as  the  con- 
text of  the  passage  (I.  i.  5)  shows.  God  has  brought 
life  to  the  world  through  his  Son  (I.  i.  1-4).  To  do 
this  was  according  to  his  nature,  which  is  light,  and 
in  which  is  no  darkness  (I.  i.  5).  God  is  perfect  and 
self-imparting  holiness.  As  light,  he  blesses  men, 
banishes  from  their  lives  the  darkness  of  sin,  and 
makes  them  participants  in  his  own  purity.  The  two 
ideas  of  life  and  light  are  placed  in  closest  relations 
in  the  Gospel  (viii.  12}  :  '•  He  that  followeth  me  shall 
not  walk  in  the  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of 
life"  (^t6  ^w?  tt)?  ^(wr}?),  —  that  is,  he  shall  possess 
within  himself  the  saving  power  which  confers  life 
upon  men  ;  he  shall  be  a  mediate  source  of  the  light 
of  truth  to  others. 

We  find  a  similar  use  of  the  figure  of  light  in  the 
prologue  of  the  Gospel.  There  the  life  that  dwells  in 
the  Logos  is  described  as  "the  light  of  men  "  (i.4). 
The  word  represents  the  self-manifesting  quality  of 
the  divine  life.  This  heavenly  light  shines  in  the 
darkness  of  the  world's  ignorance  and  sin.  Through 
the  activity  of  the  Logos  this  true  light  "  lighteth 
every  man,  coming  into  the  world"  (i.  9).  This 
passage  (especially  if   epxoii^vov  be  construed   with 


62  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

avdpcoirov  and  not  with  o)  ^  presents  the  Logos  as  the 
principle  of  self-revelation  in  God  whereby  God  has 
in  all  ages  made  himself  known  to  men.  The  the- 
ology of  John  therefore  teaches  explicitly,  in  its  own 
peculiar  terms,  the  universality  of  divine  revelation. 

Tlie  gracious,  saving  activity  of  God  is  strikingly 
presented  in  the  words  of  Jesus,  which  are  found  in 
connection  with  the  narrative  of  the  healing  of  the 
impotent  man  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  on  a  Sabbath 
(v.  2-18).  The  Jews  objected  both  to  the  performance 
of  the  cure  (verse  16)  and  to  the  man's  carrying  his 
bed  on  the  Sabbath  day  (verse  10).  "  But  Jesus 
answered  them,  My  Father  worketh  even  until  now, 
and  I  work"  (verse  17).  Activity  in  the  line  of  bless- 
ing to  his  creatures  is  accordant  with  the  very  nature 
of  God  ;  his  benevolence  knows  no  Sabbath.  In  serv- 
ing and  blessing  men  Jesus  is  but  doing  what  he  sees 
the  Father  continually  doing  (verses  19,  20).  The 
right  of  Jesus  to  work  miracles  of  grace  on  the  Sab- 
bath is  based  upon  the  perfect  harmony  of  such  action 
with  the  perpetual  working  of  the  Father,  —  the  cease- 
less outflow  of  his  boundless  goodness  in  streams  of 
blessing  to  the  world. 

The  benevolent  or  self-imparting  aspect  of  God's 
nature  is  much  more  frequently  emphasized  in  the 
Johannine  writings  than  is  his  holiness  or  self-affirm- 
ation.     References  to  the   latter   are   not,   however, 

1  As  in  our  older  English  vei-sion  :  "  That  was  the  true  Light, 
which  lighteth  every  man  that  coineth  into  the  world." 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      63 

entirely  wanting.  In  one  passage  only  in  the  Gospel 
is  the  word  SiKuio'i  applied  to  God :  "  0  righteous 
Father,  the  world  knew  thee  not,  but  I  knew  thee," 
etc.  (xvii.  25).  The  idea  of  God's  righteousness  here 
appears  to  be  that  it  is  the  quality  which  prevents 
him  from  passing  the  same  judgment  upon  Christ's 
disciples  which  he  passes  upon  the  sinful  world. 
Upon  this  equitableness  of  God,  Jesus  bases  his  con- 
fidence in  asking  that  special  blessings  be  conferred 
upon  his  disciples.  The  thought  is  similar  in  xvii.  11, 
where  the  Father  is  designated  as  ayto^.  As  the  One 
who  is  absolutely  good  —  wholly  separate  from  all 
that  is  sinful  and  wrong  —  God  is  besought  to  guard 
from  evil  those  whom  he  has  given  to  his  Son.  In 
both  these  cases  the  holiness  of  God  is  conceived  of, 
not  as  a  forensic  or  retributive  quality,  but  as  God's 
moral  self-consistency,  his  justice  to  his  own  equity. 

The  retributive  action  of  God  toward  sin  is,  how- 
ever, abundantly  recognized  in  the  Gospel  of  John. 
God  is  described  as  subjecting  the  world  to  a  con- 
tinuous process  of  judgment.  Although  the  coming 
of  Christ  into  the  world  had  salvation  and  not  judg- 
ment for  its  object  (iii.  17  ;  viii.  15  ;  xii.  47),  yet  a 
process  of  judgment  is  inevitably  involved  in  his  sav- 
ing work.  When  Jesus  says  (ix.  39),  "  For  judgment 
(et<?  Kpifia')  came  I  into  this  world,"  he  seems  to  con- 
tradict such  statements  as,  "  God  sent  not  the  Son 
into  the  world  to  judge  (tva  Kpivr))  the  world  "  (iii.  17), 
and,  "I  judge  no  man"  (viii.  15)  ;  but  a  careful  con- 
sideration of  the  context  shows  that  the  judgment  for 


M  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

which  (in  ix.  39)  he  says  he  came,  does  not  stand  in 
contrast  to  the  world's  salvation,  but  is  a  judicial 
hardening  of  the  self-righteous  who  rejected  him  and 
his  mission.  He  must,  in  the  very  act  of  presenting 
himself  to  men,  bring  to  them  the  penalty  of  their 
obduracy  in  case  they  reject  him.  He  comes  to  them 
to  call  them  to  repentance ;  but  if  they  deem  them- 
selves to  be  just  and  to  need  no  repentance,  his  com- 
ing then  necessarily  involves,  according  to  the  law  of 
the  divine  order,  an  increase  of  their  blindness.  This 
was  the  case  with  the  Jews.  They  said, "  We  see  ;  we 
have  no  need  of  thy  light  or  guidance."  He  can  there- 
fore only  pronounce  the  judgment  —  and  it  belongs  to 
his  mission  to  do  this  —  that  in  case  of  those  who  are 
of  this  spirit,  their  sin  —  the  sin  of  wilful,  moral  ob- 
duracy and  spiritual  pride  —  abides  (j]  afxapTia  vfioov 
/xe'vei,  ix.  41).  The  judgment  which  Jesus  disclaims 
is  the  world's  judgment  as  opposed  to  its  salvation  ; 
the  judgment  which  he  pronounces  is  that  which  is 
unavoidably  involved  in  the  attitude  which  men  take 
toward  the  truth  (iii.  19-21).  In  this  view  of  the 
matter  Jesus  is  represented  as  judging  men  (v.  30  ; 
viii.  16),  and  even  as  appointed  to  perform  this  func- 
tion (v.  22),  in  so  far,  that  is,  as  the  attitude  of  men 
toward  the  revelation  of  God's  grace  which  has  come 
to  them  in  human  form  (v.  27)  involves  a  test  of 
their  obedience  to  God.  In  accepting  or  rejecting 
Christ  they  honor  or  dishonor  God  himself  (v.  23), 
and  are  thereby  judged. 

Twice  in  the  First  Epistle  (I.  i.  9 ;  ii.  29)  God  is 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      65 

described  as  righteous  {SUato^),  and,  in  both  cases,  in 
a  sense  closely  akin  to  that  which  we  have  fonnd  in 
the  Gospel.  "  If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful 
and  righteous  to  forgive  us  our  sins,"  etc.  (I.  i.  9). 
The  correlation  of  the  word  righteous  with  the  word 
faithful  (TTicTTo?),  as  well  as  the  entire  context,  shows 
that  righteousness  here  is  that  quality  of  God  which 
would  certainly  lead  him  to  forgive  those  who  repent. 
It  would  be  inconsistent  in  God  —  contrary  to  his 
promises  and  to  his  nature  —  not  to  forgive  the  peni- 
tent, and  to  exert  upon  his  life  the  purifying  influences 
of  his  grace. 

In  the  remaining  passage,  the  term  righteous  has 
a  broader  meaning,  and  designates  the  moral  perfec- 
tion of  God  in  general,  as  the  type  and  ideal  of  all 
goodness  in  man  :  "  If  ye  know  that  he  [God]  is 
righteous,  ye  know  that  every  one  also  that  doeth 
righteousness  is  begotten  of  him  "  (I.  ii.  29).  Since 
God  is  essentially  righteous,  those  who  are  begotten 
of  him  must  also  be  righteous.  A  similar  thought  is 
presented  in  I.  iii.  7,  but  in  the  reverse  order.  Here, 
instead  of  deducing  from  the  divine  righteousness 
the  truth  that  those  who  live  righteously  are  begotten 
of  God,  the  apostle  starts  from  the  human  side,  and 
affirms  that  he  who  lives  a  righteous  life  is  thereby 
shown  to  be  like  the  pure  and  spotless  Son  of  God. 

The  question  now  arises  :  How,  according  to  John, 
do  men  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  God  ?  Underly- 
ing all  that  is  said  on  this  subject  is  the  idea  that  this 
knowledge  presupposes  a  likeness  between  its  subject 

5 


66  THE   JOHAXKINE   THEOLOGY 

and  its  object.  Man  can  know  God  only  as  he  be- 
comes like  God.  "  Every  one  that  loveth  .  .  .  know- 
eth  God  .  .  .  for  God  is  love"  (I.  iv.  7,  8).  It  is 
obvious  that  by  knowledge  the  apostle  here  means 
much  more  than  the  intellectual  apprehension  or  pos- 
session of  truth.  The  knowledge  of  God  is  pre  emi- 
nently an  ethical  affair,  and  implies  in  the  possessor 
of  it  a  kinship  of  life  with  God.  The  Johannine  usage 
abundantly  illustrates  this  conception  of  knowledge. 
The  sinful  world  did  not  know  the  heavenly  light  of 
the  Logos  which  was  shining  in  its  darkness  (i.  10). 
The  Jews  in  their  spiritual  blindness  have  not  known 
God  (viii.  55)  ;  "but  I  know  him,"  said  Jesus,  "  and 
keep  his  word "  (ib.y.  Whatever  be  the  precise 
meaning  of  the  phrase  "  eternal  life,"  and  the  rela- 
tion between  it  and  the  knowledge  of  God,  in  the 
passage,  "  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  should  know 
thee  the  only  true  God,"  etc.  (xvii.  3),  I  do  not  see 
how  the  objection  of  "Weiss  ^  to  the  "  deeper  sense  "  of 
the  word  know  can  be  sustained.  He  asserts  that 
"exegetical  tradition"  unwarrantably  makes  the  word 
know  in  this  passage  mean  practically  the  same  as 
love.  But  what  does  Weiss  himself  make  it  mean  ? 
He  admits  that  it  denotes  no  mere  theoretic,  but  an 
intuitive  and  contemplative  knowledge,  and  that  it  is  a 
peculiarity  of  John's  thinking  to  conceive  of  the  whole 
spiritual  being  of  man  as  a  unit  in  its  action.  He 
acknowledges  that  "  a  way  leads  direct  from  this 
knowledge  to  willing,"  ^  but  insists  that  the  view  of 

^  Der  Johanneisclie  Lehrhegriff,  §  2.  ^  7j_  page  13. 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      67 

Messner  that  the  knowledge  of  God  here  inchides  an 
action  of  the  will,  is  to  be  rejected.  The  separation 
which  Weiss  maintains  between  the  cognitive  and  the 
voluntary  elements  in  the  knowledge  of  God  is  cer- 
tainly formal  rather  than  real.  We  cannot  exclude 
the  mystical  element  from  John's  conception  of  the 
knowledge  of  God.  Even  if  the  view  which  excludes 
from  the  knowledge  of  God  the  element  of  fellowship 
with  God  and  of  likeness  to  him,  could  be  maintained 
in  the  case  of  the  passage  under  review,  it  would 
certainly  prove  inapplicable  in  the  First  Epistle,  where 
the  knowledge  of  God  is  so  blended  with  the  idea  of 
being  begotten  of  God  as  to  make  it  clear  that  this 
knowledge  is  grounded  in  a  new  direction  of  the  will 
and  affections  (I.  iv.  7). 

The  view  which  I  have  presented  is  confirmed  by 
such  passages  as  that  in  which  tlie  knowledge  of  the 
life  which  Christ  has  brought  to  the  world  is  based 
on  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ  (I.  i.  2,  3),  and  that  in  which  the  certainty  of 
possessing  the  knowledge  of  God  is  conditioned  upon 
the  keeping  of  liis  commandments  (I.  ii.  3).  In 
I.  iii,  2  the  assurance  of  becoming  like  Christ  in  the 
heavenly  world  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  we  shall 
see  him  as  he  is.^  While  the  form  of  thought  in  this 
passage  is   peculiar,  —  since  likeness  is  here  condi- 

1  I  prefer,  with  Haupt,  Rothe,  Westcott,  and  Holtzmann,  to 
refer  the  pronoiins  in  this  verse  to  Christ.  Liicke,  Huther,  and 
Plummer  refer  them  to  God.  It  must  be  admitted,  however, 
that  the  point  remains  a  doubtful  one. 


68  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

tioned  upon  knowledge  or  sight,  and  not  knowledge 
upon  likeness,  —  this  passage,  equally  with  the  others, 
illustrates  the  fundamental  Johannine  idea  of  an  in- 
separable connection  between  a  true  knowledge  of 
God  and  moral  likeness  to  him.  Finally,  in  answer 
to  the  question.  How  is  God  known  ?  we  would  quote 
the  following  passage  :  "  He  that  hath  my  command- 
ments, and  keepeth  them,  he  it  is  that  loveth  me : 
and  he  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father, 
and  I  will  love  him  and  manifest  myself  to  him. 
Judas  (not  Iscariot)  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  what  is 
come  to  pass  that  thou  will  manifest  thyself  unto  us 
and  not  unto  the  world  ?  Jesus  answered  and  said 
unto  him,  If  a  man  love  me,  he  will  keep  my  word  : 
and  my  Father  will  love  him  and  we  will  come  unto 
him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him  "  (xiv.  21-23). 

The  attributes  of  God  are  not  particularly  dwelt 
upon  in  the  writings  of  John  except  so  far  as  they 
are  involved  in  the  conception  of  God  as  spirit,  light, 
and  love.  The  omniscience  of  God  is,  however,  as- 
serted in  one  passage :  "  Hereby  shall  we  know  that 
we  are  of  the  truth,  and  shall  assure  our  heart  before 
him,  whereinsoever  our  heart  condemn  us ;  because 
God  is  greater  than  our  heart  and  knoweth  all  things" 
(I.  iii.  19,  20).  Interpreters  are  divided  upon  the 
question  whether  God's  omniscience  is  here  thought 
of  as  the  basis  of  severity  or  of  leniency  in  his  judg- 
ment of  men's  faults.  On  the  former  view  the  passage 
means  :  We  shall  persuade  (irelaoixev)  our  hearts  that 
in  whatsoever  we  condemn  ourselves,  God  condemns 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      69 

us  yet  more  severely,  because  he  is  greater  (in  strict- 
ness) than  our  heart,  and  knoweth  all  things ;  that  is, 
if  our  hearts  detect  and  condemn  our  sins,  he  in  his 
omniscience  sees  them  yet  more  clearly,  and  condemns 
them  yet  more  severely .^  For  the  linguistic  consid- 
erations which  bear  upon  the  question  I  must  refer 
to  the  critical  commentaries.^ 

It  is  necessary,  in  order  to  get  the  natural  force  of 
the  passage,  to  read  it  in  the  light  of  the  preceding 
argument.  In  verse  18  the  apostle  exhorts  his  readers 
to  cultivate  sincere  love  ;  for  by  so  doing,  he  says,  we 
shall  prove  ourselves  to  belong  to  the  truth  (19  a). 
The  sentence  which  now  follows,  "  and  shall  assure 
our  heart  before  him"  (Kal  e^uirpoadev  avrov  Treiaofiev 
Trjv  KupScav  rjficov,  19  b),  is  co-ordinate  with  the  state- 
ment, "  We  know  that  we  are  of  the  truth  ;"  that  is, 
it  expresses  the  idea  of  a  comforting  assurance  which, 
like  the  certainty  of  possessing  the  truth,  arises  from 
genuine  love.  It  seems  impossible  to  place  the  two 
parts  of  verse  19  in  contrast.  They  together  express 
the  comfort  which  springs  out  of  love.  Now  the 
second  part  of  verse  20  gives  the  reason  for  this  com- 
fort, namely,  "  God  is  greater  than  our  heart,  and 
knoweth  all  things."  But  if  greatness  in  severity 
or  judgment  were  meant,  this  could  not  be  a  ground 
of  comfort.  The  thought  therefore  is  :  Those  who 
truly  love  God  and  men  thereby  know  that  they  be- 
long to  the  truth,  and  have  this  comfort, —  that  the 

^  So,  e.g.,  Liicke,  Neander,  DeWette,  Ebrard. 
*  See,  especially,  Huther,  Haupt,  and  Westcott. 


70  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

faults  for  which  their  own  hearts  condemn  them, 
God  will  freely  forgive,  since  he  is  greater  in  mercy 
than  their  own  conscience  is.  He  knows  all  things, 
—  the  right  moral  direction  and  sincere  intentions  of 
liim  who  belongs  to  the  truth,  the  weakness  of  his 
nature,  and  the  strength  of  his  temptations,  —  and  he 
pardons  the  faults  which  still  inhere  in  the  child 
of  God  more  freely  than  the  man's  own  conscience 
condones  tliem.  The  presupposition  of  the  whole 
argument  is  that  the  life  of  the  persons  in  question 
is  ruled  by  love,  and  that  they  are  therefore  sincerely 
penitent  for  their  sins  and  desirous  to  forsake  theni.i 

In  the  Johannine  discourses  Jesus  frequently  speaks 
of  God  as  his  Father,  and  refers  to  the  intimate  fellow- 
ship which  exists  between  the  Father  and  himself 
(i.  18  ;  iii.  35 ;  v.  17  sq.).  But  God  is  also  the  Father 
in  his  relation  to  men  generally.  "  The  true  worship- 
pers shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  truth" 
(iv.  23).  Especially  in  his  assurances  to  his  disciples 
that  their  prayers  in  iiis  name  will  be  answered,  does 
Jesus  speak  of  God  as  the  Father :  "  If  ye  shall  ask 
anything  of  the  Father,  he  will  give  it  you  in  my 
name"  (xvi.  23  ;  cf.  xv.  16).  In  the  Epistles  also  God 
is  frequently  spoken  of  as  the  Father,  without  further 
definition  (I.  ii.  1 ;  iii.  1 ;  II.  3,  4).  God,  then,  is 
the  Fatlier  of  all  men.  Does  it  therefore  follow  that 
all  men  are  his  children  ?  Are  the  two  terms  strictly 
correlated  ?     There  are  two  passages  which  must  bo 

1  This  interpretation,  in  substance,  is  adopted  by  Haupt, 
Westcott,  Huther,  and  D wight. 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      Tl 

appealed  to  in  answer :  "  As  many  as  received  him, 
to  them  gave  he  the  right  (i^ovaiav)  to  become  chil- 
dren of  God  (re/cva  deov  yeveadai),  even  to  them  that 
believe  on  his  name"  (i.  12).  Here,  certainly,  men 
are  said  to  receive,  on  condition  of  faith  in  Christ,  the 
right  or  privilege  of  becoming  sons  of  God,  —  a  state- 
ment which  clearly  implies  that  they  were  not  such 
before.  In  the  following  verse  (13)  the  apostle 
explains  that  men  become  children  of  God  by  a 
spiritual  renewal  or  transformation.  Men  are  not 
naturally  children  of  God  in  the  sense  of  the  terms 
of  this  passage ;  in  other  words,  the  natural  relation 
in  which  all  men  alike  stand  to  God  as  his  creatures 
or  offspring  is  not  designated  as  sonship.  That  term 
is  reserved  to  express  the  relation  of  likeness,  fellow- 
ship, and  loving  obedience  into  which  men  enter  by 
faith.  It  is  true  that  all  men  are  ideally  sons  of 
God,  —  that  is,  it  is  their  true  destiny,  and  they  have 
the  capacity,  to  become  such.  But  they  actually 
enter  upon  the  possession  of  this  divine  privilege 
only  through  an  inward  transformation. 

The  other  passage  to  which  reference  must  be 
made  is  I.  iii.  1 :  "  Behold  what  manner  of  love  the 
Father  hath  bestowed  upon  us,  that  we  should  be 
called  children  of  God  (jeKva  deoii)  :  and  such  we 
are."  The  writer  is  addressing  his  fellow-Christians. 
This  condition  of  sonship  to  God  he  describes  as  tlie 
result  of  a  spiritual  begetting,  the  reality  of  which  is 
attested  by  the  doing  of  righteousness  (I.  iii.  9,  10). 
Sonship  to  God,  therefore,  in  tlie  sense  of  the  passage, 


72  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

is  conditioned  upon  being  begotten  of  God,  that  is, 
upon  the  renewal  of  the  natural  man  by  regeneration. 
We  may,  then,  state  the  conclusion  to  which  these 
passages  lead  us  in  this  paradoxical  form :  God  is 
the  Father  of  men,  but  men  become  sons  of  God.^ 
Between  God  the  Creator  and  man  the  creature  the 
ideal  relation  is  one  of  unity  and  harmony.  But  this 
ideal  relation  does  not,  as  matter  of  fact,  exist.  Man 
has  impaired  it  by  sin.  God  continues  good  and 
gracious  to  man  ;  he  always  corresponds  to  the  per- 
fect idea  of  what  he  should  be ;  he  is  the  Father  still ; 
but  man  has  forfeited  his  moral  sonship  to  God,  in- 
volving fellowship  and  likeness,  by  disobedience.  In 
this  sense  God  can  be  called  the  Father  of  men 
because  he  always  remains  actually  in  his  relations 
to  men  what  he  is  ideally ;  whereas  men  must  become 
sons  of  God  because  they  are  not  actually  what  they 
are  ideally ;  it  is  on  their  side  that  the  ideal  relation 
has  been  impaired ;  on  their  side,  therefore,  must  it 
be  restored.  Only  as  men  renounce  their  sins  and 
become  obedient  and  like  to  God,  do  they  become,  in 
an  ethical  sense,  his  sons.  The  language  of  John 
especially  emphasizes  the  idea  of  growth  in  likeness 
and  fellowship  with  God  by  the  use  of  the  word 
child  (reKvov^  rather  than  son  (ylo^i).  The  latter 
word  —  characteristic  of  Paul  —  emphasizes  the  dig- 
nity of  the  believer's  position,  while  the  former 
emphasizes  more  the  close  relation  of  fellowship 
with  God  into  which  the  believer  has  entered,  —  a 

1  CJ.  Weudt,  Teachincj  nj  Jesux,  i.  194. 


THE  IDEA  OF  GOD  IN  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN      73 

relation  in  which  lies  the  guaranty  of  his  continuous 
progress  in  all  that  is  Godlike.  This  distinction  is 
well  defined  by  Haupt :  "  According  to  Paul,  we 
secure,  for  Christ's  sake,  the  right  of  "a  child  (Kindes- 
rechf)  ;  according  to  John,  we  secure,  through  Christ, 
the  nature  of  a  child"  {Kindesiveseri)} 

How  evident  it  is  that  the  idea  of  God  which  is 
found  in  the  writings  of  John  is  one  which  accords 
with  the  demands  of  the  religious  life.  Those  aspects 
of  the  divine  character  are  presented  which  are  essen- 
tial to  practical  religious  thought,  and  inspiring  to 
religious  confidence  and  joy.  We  do  not  meet  in 
these  writings  the  God  of  abstract  philosophical 
speculation,  —  the  vague,  absentee  Deity  of  Gnosti- 
cism,—  but  the  Father  of  our  spirits  and  the  God 
of  all  tender  mercies.  The  God  whom  this  apostle 
knows  and  proclaims  is  the  living  God,  who  per- 
petually reveals  his  goodness  to  men,  and  who  comes 
to  the  world  in  the  fulness  of  his  grace  and  truth  in 
the  person  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ. 

^  Commentary,  on  I.  iii.  1. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   LOGOS 

Literature.  —  Lucke  :  Commentar  iiber  das  Evangelium  des 
Johannes,  Der  Prolog,  pp.  249-294,  and  365-378,  translated  in 
the  Christian  Examiner  for  1849,  pp.  165-189  and  412-432; 
Weiss  :  Der  Johanneische  Lehrbegriff,  Die  sogenannte  johan- 
neische  LogosleTrre,  pp.  239-251 ;  Blbl.  Theol.  The  Christology,  ii. 
325-347;  Reuss:  Hist.  Christ.  Theol. ,  Of  the  Essential  Nature 
of  the  Word,  ii.  389-399  (orig.  ii.  435-447);  Bauk  :  Neutest. 
Theol.,  Der  Logos  als  das  gottliches  Offenbarungsorgan,  pp.  356- 
359 ;  Lias  :  Doctr.  Syst.  of  St.  John,  Doctrine  of  the  Logos  and  the 
Person  of  Christ,  pp.  33-64;  Siegfried  :  Philo  von  Alexandria, 
Die  Lehre  vom  Logos,  pp.  219-229,  and  Das  Johannesevangel- 
ium,  pp.  317-321 ;  Frommann  :  Der  Johann.  Lehrb.,  passim  (F. 
treats  the  whole  theology  of  John  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
Logos-doctrine);  Lipskis:  art.  Alexandrinische  Religionsphil- 
osophie  in  Schenkel's  Bibel-Lexicon ;  Schurer  :  Hist.  Jeivish 
People,  Philo,  the  Jewish  Philosopher,  iii.  821-381 ;  Gloag  : 
Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writings,  Dissertation  on  the 
Logos,  pp.  167-189 ;  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary,  arts,  on  The 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  and  The  Word  (For  ample  references  to 
the  literature  of  the  subject  see  especially  the  latter  article ; 
also  Schurer  and  Gloag,  op.  cit.) ;  Sanday  :  The  Authorship  and 
Historical  Character  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  The  Prologue,  pp.  5- 
20 ;  Harnack  :  Ueber  das  Verhiiltniss  des  Prologs  des  vierten 
Evangeliums  zum  ganzen  Werk,  in  the  Zeitschrift  fur  Theol- 
ogie  und  Kirche,  2  Jahrg.,  3  Heft,  1892 ;  Salmond  :  article 
Logos  in  the  Encyclopcedia  Britan7iica  ;  Weizsacker  :  Das  apos. 
Zeitalter,  Die  Logoslehre,  pp.  549-558  ;  Liddon  :  The  Divinity  of 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       75 

our  Lord,  Lect.  H.  Anticipations  of  Christ's  Divinity  in  the  Old 
Testament,  pp.  45-99,  and  Lect.  V.  The  Doctrine  of  Christ's 
Divinity  in  the  Writings  of  St.  John,  pp.  209-278.  For  full 
discussions  of  the  Logos-doctrine  in  Philo  and  in  Greek  Phil- 
osophy I  refer  to  the  following  works :  James  Drummond  : 
Philo  J'udceus,  or,  Jewish  Alexandrian  Philosophy  in  its  Develop- 
ment and  Completion,  London,  1888;  E.  Zeller  :  Die  Philosophie 
der  Griechen,  u.  s.  w.,  3  Theil,  2  Abtheilung,  pp.  338-418;  M. 
Heinze  :  Die  Lehre  vom  Logos  in  der  Griechischen  Philosophie, 
Oldenburg,  1872,  pp.  204-297.  For  the  critical  exposition  of 
the  language  of  the  prologue  I  would  refer  especially  to  the 
Commentaries  of  Liicke,  Meyei',  Westcott,  and  Godet. 

The  most  characteristic  single  doctrine  which  is 
found  in  the  writings  of  John  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Logos  or  Word.  He  uses  this  term  to  denote  the 
pre-existent  Son  of  God  who  became  incarnate  in 
Jesus.  It  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  apostle 
does  not  explain  the  word  or  seek  to  justify  its  use 
by  argument,  that  it  was  a  term  of  current  speech 
which  he  assumes  that  his  readers  will  understand. 
But  to  modern  ears  the  term  Word  has  a  strange 
sound  as  a  designation  for  Christ,  and  the  force  of 
John's  use  of  it  can  only  liecome  apparent  by  an 
investigation  of  its  historical  meaning. 

Baur  and  his  school,  who  ascribed  the  Gospel  to  a 
Christian  Gnostic  who  wrote  about  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  held  that  the  idea  of  the  Logos  was  de- 
rived from  the  Gnostic  systems  ;  ^  but  all  the  consider- 
ations which  have  been  adduced  since  Baur's  time  in 

1  See,  e.  g.,  Baur:  Neutest.  TheoL,  p.  361  sq.;  Ffleiderer: 

Urchristenthum,  p   698, 


Y6  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

favor  of  an  earlier  date  for  the  Gospel  unite  to  render 
this  supposition  improbable.  The  Logos-idea  is  indeed 
found  in  the  sj^stems  of  Basilides  and  Valentinus, 
but  it  is  only  a  minor  element  in  a  complex  series  of 
aeons  or  emanations.  The  Logos  in  these  systems 
has  a  different  character  and  an  inferior  significance 
compared  with  those  which  it  bears  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 

It  is  still  a  debatable  question  whether  the  primary 
source  of  John's  Logos-doctrine  was  Jewish  or  Alex- 
andrian, —  whether  we  are  to  look  chiefly  to  the  Old 
Testament  or  to  Philo  for  its  explanation.  The  latter 
has  long  been,  and  doubtless  is  still  the  prevailing 
vievv.^  But  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  even  if  we  attrib- 
ute John's  use  of  the  term  Logos  to  the  direct  or 
indirect  influence  of  Philo,  we  do  not  thereby  dis- 
prove the  Old  Testament  origin  of  the  conception. 
Two  main  streams  of  thought  met  and  mingled  in 
the  Alexandrian  philosophy,  —  one  Hellenic,  eman- 
ating from  Plato  and  the  Stoics,  the  other  Jewish, 
emanating  from  the  Old  Testament  and  the  later 
Jewish  theology.  Philo  was  a  devout  Jew,  and  the 
basis  of  his  pliilosophy  of  religion  was  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. With  the  Jewish  religion  he  sought  to  blend 
ideas  derived  from  the  Greek  philosophy,  on  the  as- 
sumption that  this  philosophy  was  also  the  product  of 
a  real  divine  inspiration.     The  result  was  a  conglom- 

1  So,  for  example,  Meyer,  Liicke,  Reuss,  Beyschlag,  Weiz- 
s'acker,  Harnack ;  per  contra,  Luthardt,  Weiss,  Licldon,  Godet, 
Plummer. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       77 

erate  system,  incoherent  and  self-contradictory  in 
many  of  its  parts,  but  still  resting,  in  the  belief  of 
its  author,  upon  an  Old  Testament  basis. 

In  order  clearly  to  indicate  the  bearings  of  the 
question  at  issue,  it  is  necessary  briefly  to  illustrate 
the  ideas  from  the  Old  Testament,  and  those  from 
Philo,  which  stand  connected  with  the  Johannine  use 
of  the  term  Logos. 

In  the  Old  Testament  we  frequently  meet  with  the 
phrase  "  word  of  Jehovah  "  as  a  symbol  of  the  power 
of  God  or  of  the  energizing  of  his  will. 

"  By  the  word  of  the  Lord  were  the  heavens  made  ; 
And  all  the  host  of  them  by  the  breath  of  the  mouth. 

For  he  spake,  and  it  was  done  ; 

He  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast "  (Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  9). 

These  expressions  are  based  upon  the  idea  of  God's 
creative  fiat,  as  it  appears,  for  example,  in  the  cos- 
mogony in  Genesis  :  "  And  Grod  said,  Let  there  be," 
etc.  In  some  passages,  "  the  word  of  God  "  is  poetic- 
ally described  as  an  energetic  agent  which  is  active 
in  accomplishing  the  divine  purposes ;  as  when,  in  a 
description  of  God's  action  in  nature,  it  is  said  : 
"  He  sendeth  out  his  commajidment  upon  earth ;  His 
word  runneth  very  swiftly"  (Ps.  cxlvii.  15),  or  as 
when,  through  the  prophet,  Jehovah  declares  that 
his  word  shall  accomplish  that  which  he  pleases 
(Is.  Iv.  10, 11). 

With  the  use  of  God's  word  as  a  symbol  of  his 
power,  is  closely  connected  the  use  of  it  as  a  name  for 


78  THE   JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

the  revelation  of  his  will,  applied  especially  to  his 
messages  to  men  through  the  prophets.  Isaiah  "  saw 
the  word  [of  Jehovah]  concerning  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem (Is.  ii.  1).  "  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  "  is 
the  formula  with  which  most  of  the  prophetic  books 
are  prefaced. 

Some  of  the  passages  already  quoted  illustrate  a 
tendency  to  personify  the  word.  This  tendency  is 
still  more  noticeable  where  attributes  of  God  are 
predicated  of  his  word,  as  when  it  is  affirmed  to  be 
right  (Ps.  xxxiii.  4),  enduring  (Ps.  cxix.  89),  and 
powerful  (Jer.  xxiii.  29).  These  personifications  are, 
of  course,  poetical,  but  they  illustrate  the  beginnings 
of  a  mode  of  thought  which  is  carried  much  further  in 
the  uses  of  the  terms  tvord  and  wisdom  which  we  have 
yet  to  notice,  and  which  throws  light  upon  the  genesis 
and  significance  of  the  Johannine  Logos-doctrine. 

In  the  Book  of  Job  and  in  Proverbs  we  find  a 
personification  of  wisdom.  In  Job  the  term  is  a 
poetical  designation  for  the  gracious  purpose  of  God 
which  he  is  working  out  in  human  experience.  Hence 
in  the  theodicy  of  the  book  it  is  only  the  righteous 
man  who  knows  and  shares  in  this  wisdom.  This 
divine  wisdom  is  the  great  secret  of  life  (Job  xxviii., 
passim').  It  is  more  securely  hidden  from  men  than 
are  the  metals  in  the  earth  (1-6)  ;  the  wild  birds 
and  beasts  have  not  found  in  the  rocks  and  mountains 
its  hiding  place  (7,  8^  ;  the  costliest  jewels  cannot 
equal  it  in  value  (15-19);  only  God  "knoweth  the 
place  thereof"  (23). 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS      79 

"  Whence  then  cometh  wisdom  ? 
And  where  is  the  place  of  understanding  ? 

Behold,  the  fear  of  the  Lord,  that  is  wisdom ; 

And  to  depart  from  evil  is  understanding  "  (20,  28). 

More  strikingly  still  is  wisdom  personified  in  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  (clis.  viii.,  ix.).  She  is  the  cardinal 
virtue  who  stands  on  the  street-corners  and  at  the  city 
gates,  and  invites  men  to  walk  in  her  ways  (viii.  1-4). 
God  created,  or  prepared  her,  before  the  world  was 
made  (22-29),  and  she  was  at  his  side  as  the  art- 
ist who  shares  the  Creator's  plans ;  she  was  "  daily 
his  delight,  rejoicing  always  before  him "  (30)  ;  she 
therefore  exhorts  men  to  listen  to  her  instruction  and 
assures  those  who  do  so  of  life,  blessedness,  and  the 
favor  of  Heaven  (32-36). 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  conception  represented  by 
the  word  of  God  in  Hebrew  thought  relates  more  to 
the  divine  activity ;  that  represented  by  wisdom  re- 
lates more  to  the  divine  attributes.  Both  terms  are 
means  of  expressing  the  idea  of  the  living,  self-reveal- 
ing God.  The  manifestations  of  Jehovah's  power, 
especially  in  nature,  arc  the  operations  of  his  wo)'d  ; 
the  revelation  of  his  ethical  nature  and  of  the  moral 
requirements  which  God  makes  of  men,  is  the  voice 
of  his  wisdom. 

The  next  step  in  the  development  of  thought  which 
we  are  tracing  is  found  in  the  Apocryphal  books, 
"  Ecclesiasticus  "  or  "  Jesus,  the  Son  of  Sirach,"  and 
"  The    Wisdom   of    Solomon."      Both    these    books 


80  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

belong  to  the  second  century  before  Christ,  and  rep- 
resent —  especially  the  Book  of  Wisdom  —  a  develop- 
ment of  Biblical  ideas  under  the  influence  of  Greek 
speculation.  "  Ecclesiasticus  "  is  clearly  an  imitation 
of  the  canonical  Book  of  Proverbs.  Its  fullest  de- 
scriptions of  wisdom  are  found  in  chapters  i.and  xxiv. 
The  ideas  closely  resemble  those  of  Proverbs  viii. 
which  we  have  noticed.  A  few  examples  are  here 
adduced :  — 

"  All  wisdom  cometh  from  the  Lord, 
And  is  with  him  forever. 


Wisdom  was  created  before  all  things, 

And  prudent  understanding  from  everlasting. 


He  created  her,  and  saw  her,  and  made  her  known, 
And  poured  her  out  ujson  all  his  works. 

The  root  of  wisdom  is  to  fear  the  Lord, 

And  the  branches  thereof  are  long  life  "  (i.  1,  4,  9,  20). 

In  chapter  xxiv.  is  found  a  much  more  highly 
colored  description  of  wisdom  in  the  form  of  a  solilo- 
quy which  represents  the  most  characteristic  thought 
of  the  book.     We  quote  a  few  verses  :  — 

"  I  came  forth  from  the  mouth  of  the  Most  High, 
And  covered  the  earth  as  a  mist. 
I  dwelt  in  the  heights. 
And  my  throne  was  on  a  cloudy  pillar. 
I  alone  compassed  the  arch  of  heaven, 
And  walked  about  in  the  depth  of  abysses. 
In  the  waves  of  the  sea,  and  in  all  the  earth, 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   LOGOS  81 

And  in  every  people  and  nation,  I  got  a  possession. 

With  all  these  I  sought  rest ; 

And  in  whose  inheritance  should  I  abide  ? 

Then  the  Creator  of  all  things  gave  nie  a  commandment, 

And  he  that  made  me  caused  my  tabernacle  to  I'est, 

And  said,  Let  thy  dwelling  be  in  Jacob, 

And  thine  inheritance  in  Israel. 

He  created  me  from  the  beginning,  before  the  world, 

And  I  shall  never  fail. 

In  the  holy  tabernacle  I  served  before  him; 

And  so  was  I  established  in  Sion  "  (xxiv.  3-10). 

It  is  evident  that  we  have  here  a  poetic  description 
of  God's  self-revelation  under  an  objective  and  per- 
sonal form.  The  intention  of  the  passage  is  not  to 
hypostatize  wisdom,  but  only  to  personify,  for  rhetori- 
cal effect,  the  manifestation  of  God's  attributes  which 
is  made  in  the  government  of  the  world,  and  espec- 
ially in  the  Old  Testament  law. 

In  the  Book  of  Wisdom  the  development  of  thought 
is  carried  one  step  farther.  Its  author  was  evidently 
an  Alexandrian  Jew  who  sought  to  combine  Greek 
speculation  with  the  Jewish  religion,  and  who  may 
therefore  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  forerunners  of 
that  peculiar  philosophy  of  religion  which  is  best 
represented  in  Philo.  Solomon  is  the  speaker.  In 
chapters  vii.  and  viii.,  he  gives  a  description  of  wis- 
dom, "  who  she  is,  and  how  she  arose"  (vi.  22).  She 
is  "the  artificer  of  all  things"  (vii.  21),  a  subtle,  all- 
permeating  principle  (vii.  24),  "  is  initiated  into  the 
mysteries  of  the  knowledge  of  God,  and  is  a  chooser 
of  his  works  "  (viii.  4).    "  She  is  a  breath  of  the  power 

6 


82  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  God,  and  a  pure  effluence  from  the  glory  of  the 
Almighty ;  therefore  no  defiling  thing  falls  into  her ; 
for  she  is  a  reflection  of  the  everlasting  light  {hirav- 
<yaa^a  (fxorb^  alhlov  ;  cf.  airav'^aaixa  Tr]S  S6^rj<;  k.  t.  X,., 
Heb.  i.  3),  and  an  unspotted  mirror  of  the  efficiency 
of  God,  and  image  of  his  goodness.  And  though 
but  one,  she  can  do  all  things  ;  and  though  remaining 
in  herself,  she  maketh  all  things  new  ;  and  from  gen- 
eration to  generation  entering  into  holy  souls,  she 
equippeth  friends  of  God,  and  prophets.  For  God 
loveth  none  but  him  that  dwelleth  with  wisdom.  For 
she  is  more  beautifid  than  the  sun,  and  above  every 
position  of  stars  ;  being  compared  with  the  light,  she 
is  found  superior  "  (vii.  25-29). 

It  is  impossible  to  determine  with  certainty  how  far 
this  ascription  of  personal  qualities  and  activities  to 
wisdom  is  to  be  regarded  as  merely  poetic  or  figurative. 
The  description  of  wisdom  as  a  holy  spirit  of  light  and 
an  active  agent  of  God  in  the  world  seems  to  form  a 
connecting  link  between  the  poetical  personifications 
in  the  canonical  Wisdom-books  and  the  Logos-doctrine 
of  Philo,  the  chief  features  of  which  we  shall  presently 
notice. 

Attention  should  here  be  directed  to  the  personifica- 
tion of  the  ivo7'd  (Memra)  of  Jehovah  which  is  found 
in  the  Targums  or  Aramaic  paraphrases  of  the  Old 
Testament  books. ^  These  Targums  were  in  current 
use  among  the  Jews  in  the  apostolic  age,  and  John 

^  See  Weber,  Die  Lehren  des  Talmud,  Das  Meiura  Jehova's, 
pp.  174-179. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       83 

was  probably  acquainted  with  their  phraseoh)gj.  They 
personified  the  word  of  God  and  ascribed  to  it  divine 
power  in  order  more  completely  to  separate  God  from 
the  world.  Especially  were  the  anthropomorphic  acts 
of  God  referred  to  the  Memra.  Instead  of  Adam  and 
Eve  hearing  the  voice  of  the  Lord  in  the  garden  (Gen. 
iii.  8),  they  are  said  to  have  heard  the  voice  of  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  and  the  like.  This  word  is  described 
by  the  Rabbis  as  proceeding  out  of  the  mouth  of  God 
and  becoming  an  active  potency,  a  personal  hypostasis, 
whom  the  angels  serve  in  executing  the  divine  will. 
God  dwells  in  and  works  through  the  Memra ;  he 
stands  for  the  popular  thought  in  the  place  of  Jehovah, 
and  the  providential  and  redemptive  acts  of  God  are 
freely  ascribed  to  him.  The  Memra  of  the  paraphrasts 
presents  a  striking  analogy  to  the  Logos  of  the  Jewish 
Alexandrian  philosopher  Philo  (fl.  40-50  a.  d.). 

Philo's  system  is  a  complex  of  Jewish,  Greek,  and 
Oriental  elements.  As  a  Jew  he  believed  in  the  God 
of  the  Old  Testament,  but  under  the  influence  of  phil- 
osophy he  was  led  to  the  most  abstract  conception  of 
his  nature.  God  was  absolutely  removed  from  the 
world  and  could  have  no  contact  with  it.  Between  the 
pure  Spirit  and  the  sensible  world  there  could  be  no 
communication.  This  gulf  between  the  transcendent 
Deity  and  the  lower  world  Philo  sought  to  bridge  by 
his  doctrine  of  intermediate  powers  or  ideas.  The 
sum  or  epitome  of  these  various  agencies  is  the  Logos. 
This  term  Philo  probably  adopted  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, but  the  content  and  use  of  it  were  determined 


84        THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

by  that  gnosis  which  had  its  principal  sources  in  the 
Platonic  doctrine  of  ideas  and  in  the  Stoic  doctrine  of 
causes  or  powers. 

The  term  Logos,  as  denoting  the  archetypal  idea, 
was  fitted  to  express  both  the  immanent  reason  of  God 
and  also  the  principle  of  revelation  in  the  divine  nature. 
The  Logos,  considered  as  immanent  reason,  correspond- 
ing to  unuttered  thought  (Xojo'i  evhiddeTo<i)  in  man,  is 
as  transcendent  and  incomprehensible  as  God  him- 
self ;  but  in  its  other  aspect  as  an  active,  forth-putting 
power,  corresponding  to  uttered  thought  {Xojo'i  7rpo(})op- 
LKo^)  in  man,  the  Logos  is  the  medium  of  God's  self- 
communication  by  which  he  reveals  himself  in  creation 
and  providence.  This  uttered  Word  is  the  agent 
through  whom  God  created  the  world  and  is  continu- 
ally active  within  it.  In  him  is  summed  up  all  divine 
wisdom  and  goodness.  He  is  the  first-born  son  of  God, 
the  highest  angel,  the  second  God  (6  Set'Tcpo?  ^eo'?). 

Whether  Philo  regards  the  Logos  as  strictly  a  person 
distinct  from  God  is  a  disputed  question.  The  diffi- 
culty of  deciding  it  with  certainty  arises  from  the 
shifting  and  inconsistent  meanings  in  which  he  employs 
the  term.  Much  of  his  language  can,  no  doubt,  be 
explained  as  poetical,  and  in  no  case  can  a  clear  and 
consistent  conception  be  derived  from  his  expressions. 
But  after  all  due  allowance  is  made  for  vague  and 
figurative  language,  there  remains,  I  think,  decisive 
evidence  that  his  descriptions  of  the  Logos  can  denote 
nothing  less  than  a  real  person,  an  hypostasis  distinct 
from  God.      Since  the  Lofjos  is  defined  to   be  "  the 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       85 

second  God  "  in  a  figurative  sense  (eV  Karaxpwet,) ,  is 
begotten  of  the  Father,  and  therefore  dependent  for  his 
existence  upon  him,  the  monotheism  of  Philo  would 
not  be  undermined  by  the  ascription  of  personality  to 
the  Logos. 

Such  are  the  elements  of  the  Logos-doctrine  in  its 
various  stages  of  development.  It  is  rooted  in  the  soil 
of  the  Old  Testament.  But,  although  it  stands  in 
direct  connection  with  the  Old  Testament  personifica- 
tion of  God's  power  under  the  term  word  and  the 
personification  of  his  ethical  attributes  under  the  term 
tvisdom,  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  the  Logos-idea 
should  have  taken  the  form  which  it  has  assumed  in 
Philo  except  through  contact  with  Greek  speculation. 
The  doctrine  of  ideas  as  the  archetypal  essences  of  all 
things  and  kindred  forms  of  thought,  and  the  concep- 
tion of  God's  metaphysical  absoluteness,  are  the  two 
elements  of  Greek  thought  which  gave  shape  to  the 
idea  of  the  Logos  which  Philo  had  derived  from  the 
Old  Testament.  The  Logos-doctrine  was  a  means  of 
showing  how  the  transcendent  God  might  still  come 
into  relation  with  the  world  and  man.  The  later  Jewish 
theology,  whicli  more  and  more  removed  God  from 
active  contact  with  the  world,  solved  the  same  problem 
by  its  doctrine  of  angels  who  were  the  agents  of  God 
in  all  his  acts.  We  have  occasional  traces  of  this 
tendency  to  ascribe  God's  action  to  tlie  mediation  of 
angels  in  the  New  Testament.^ 

1  Acts  vii.  35  ;  Heb.  ii.  2  ;  and,  especially.  Gal.  iii.  19,  where  the 
giving  of  the  law  is  ascribed  to  the  mediation  of  angels,  —  an 


86  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  said  that  the 
Logos-idea  must  have  been  a  familiar  one  when  the 
apostle  John  wrote.  Wisdom  literature  had  been 
current  for  two  centuries  or  more,  and  the  elaborate 
system  of  Philo  was  wrought  out  forty  or  fifty  years 
before  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written.  The  apostle 
did  not  adopt  the  word  Logos  because  he  was  him- 
self inventing  some  recondite  system  of  speculation 
concerning  the  person  of  Christ.  He  adopted  it  as  a 
term  of  current  philosophical  speech  in  order  by  its 
use  to  adapt  his  idea  of  Christ's  pre-existence  and 
divinity  to  the  minds  of  his  Greek  readers.  In  his 
use  of  it  we  need  not  suppose  that  it  retains  precisely 
the  same  associations  and  contents  which  it  had  in  the 
speculations  of  the  time.  On  the  contrary,  it  bears 
quite  a  new  character  as  employed  by  John.  "  The 
personification  of  the  divine  word  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  poetical,  in  Philo  metaphysical,  in  St.  John 
historical."  ^  The  use  of  the  term  is  an  illustration 
of  the  natural  tendency  of  Christian  thought  to  avail 
itself  of  the  philosophical  conceptions  and  phraseology 
which  prevail  at  any  given  time.  Other  examples  are 
found  in  Paul's  use,  in  the  Epistles  of  the  Imprison- 
ment, of  terms  derived  from  an  incipient  Gnosticism, 
especially  TrXripco/jia,  and    the  wide   adoption   in  the 

idea  not  found  in  the  narrative  of  the  giving  of  the  law.  It  is 
probably  found,  however,  in  the  original  of  Deut.  xxxiii.  2,  and 
is  clearly  expressed  by  the  Septuagint  rendering  of  that  passage 
(ayyekoL  fier'  avTov). 

1  Plummer,  Cambridge  Gk.  Test.   Notes  on  John  i.  1. 


TPIE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   LOGOS  87 

theological  language  of  our  time  of  phraseology  de- 
rived from  the  theory  of  evolution.  It  is  as  if  John 
had  said  to  his  readers :  You  are  familiar  with  the 
speculations  which  have  long  been  rife  respecting  the 
means  whereby  God  reveals  himself,  —  the  doctrine 
of  an  intermediate  agent  through  whom  he  commu- 
nicates his  light  and  life  to  men.  The  true  answer 
to  the  question  regarding  this  mediator  is,  that  it  is 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  He  is  God's  agent  in  revela- 
tion ;  he  is  the  bond  which  unites  heaven  and  earth. 

The  development  of  the  Logos-doctrine  which  we 
have  briefly  traced  indicates  the  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion as  to  the  origin  of  the  idea  in  the  writings  of 
John.  It  cannot  be  explained  without  reference  to 
Philo.  Whether  John  had  ever  read  the  writings  of 
Philo  we  do  not  know.  Whether  he  was  directly 
familiar  with  Philo's  system  we  have  no  means  of 
deciding.  But  that  he  was  familiar  with  that  type  of 
speculation  concerning  the  Logos  whose  chief  repre- 
sentative is  found  in  Philo  seems  certain,  and  some 
direct  knowledge  of  Philo's  system  is  highly  probable. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  we  cannot  naturally  explain  his 
use  of  the  term  Logos  without  supposing  Iiim  and  his 
readers  to  have  been  somewhat  familiar  with  Alex- 
andrian thought.  But  it  is  none  the  less  true  that 
John's  Logos-doctrine  is  rooted  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, partly  because  he  was  himself  familiar  with  the 
Jewish  ideas  of  the  word  and  wisdom,  and  partly  be- 
cause in  Philo's  system  the  conception  of  the  word  is 
an  elaboration  of  these  ideas  under  forms  of  thought 


88  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

derived  from  Greek  philosophy.  The  dispute  whether 
John's  Logos-doctrine  is  Jewish  or  Alexandrian  draws 
the  lines  too  closely.  It  is  both,  for  the  Alexandrian 
philosophy  of  religion  was  largely  Jewish.  Both  the 
effort  to  find  the  occasion  and  ground  of  John's  doc- 
trine in  the  Old  Testament  alone,^  and  the  failure  to 
take  account  of  the  Old  Testament  basis  of  the  doc- 
trine,^ are  alike  unwarranted.  The  fact  is  that  the 
philosophy  of  Philo,  which  developed  and  applied  the 
Old  Testament  idea,  was  the  medium  through  which 
that  idea  became  available  for  the  apostle's  purpose, 
and  so  passed  into  his  writings. 

.  Let  us  now  turn  to  the  prologue  of  the  Gospel, 
i.  1-18,  and  see  in  what  way  and  for  what  purpose 
John  employs  the  Logos-idea.  From  such  an  ex- 
amination we  shall  be  able  to  determine  the  points 
of  likeness  and  of  difference  between  John's  Logos- 
doctrine  and  that  of  Philo,  and  to  define  the  pur- 
pose of  the  doctrine  in  its  relation  to  the  Gospel  as  a 
whole. 

The  prologue  begins  with  the  idea  of  the  eternity  of 
the  Logos  (ev  ap^fj  rjv  6  X6'yo<;,  i.  1).  This  idea  is 
repeated  in  verse  2  (^ovto<;  rjv  iv  ap'^^rj  irpb'?  tov  6e6v)^ 
and  is  confirmed  by  the  expression  of  Jesus  in  xvii.  5, 
where  he  speaks  of  the  glory  which  he  had  with  the 
Father  "  before  the  world  was  "  (irph  tov  tov  Koa-fjLov 
elvai) .  To  the  same  effect  is  his  statement,  "  Before 
Abraham  was  born,  I  am  Qirplv  ^A^paafjb  yevea-dai  iyoo 

^  See,  e.  g.,  Weiss,  Der  Johann.  Lehrh.,  pp.  244,  245. 
^  See,  e.  g.,  Weizsacker,  Das  apoMol.  Zeitalter,  p.  551. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE    LOGOS  89 

ei/At",  viii.  58;  cf.  Ps.  xc.  2).  In  the  opening  words  of 
the  First  Epistle  (I.  i.  1)  we  find  a  parallel  to  the  be- 
gining  of  the  prologue,  where  the  saving  grace  which 
came  to  tlie  world  in  Christ  is  designated  as  "  that 
which  was  from  the  beginning"   (o  rjv  air  cip')(rj'i') . 

It  has  been  held  by  many  that  these  statements 
amount  only  to  an  assertion  of  the  relative  pre-exist- 
ence  of  the  Logos,  and  are  not  equivalent  to  an  af- 
firmation of  his  eternity.^  The  opening  words  of  the 
prologue  present,  no  doubt,  an  allusion  and  a  parallel 
to  the  opening  words  of  Genesis.  Reuss  therefore 
affirms  that  "  if  we  infer  from  these  words  the  eter- 
nity of  the  Word,  we  must  infer  also  from  the  begin- 
ning of  Genesis  the  eternity  of  the  world."  But, 
supposing  that  in  both  cases  the  word  "  beginning  " 
denotes  the  beginning  of  time,  there  remains  the 
important  difference  that  in  Genesis  that  which  is 
placed  at  the  beginning  is  an  act  (creation),  while  in 
John  that  which  is  placed  at  the  beginning  is  the 
existence  of  the  Word.  The  Word  ivas  at  the  begin- 
ning ;  he  existed  before  the  world  came  into  being.  It 
is  true  that  John  does  not  employ  the  words  eternal 
or  eternity  in  the  connection,  but  we  hold  that  this 
idea  is  involved  in  the  logical  relation  between  the 
terms  was  and  in  the  beginning.  When  John  speaks 
of  that  which  comes  into  existence  he  uses  both  a 
different  word  and  a  different  tense  (irdvTa  8c  avrov 
iyevero,  k.  t.  X.,  i.  3).  All  things  came  into  being,  but 
in  the  beginning  of  things  he  toas.     Without  assign - 

1  See,  e.  g.,  Reuss,  op.  cit.,  ii.  391,  392  (orig.  ii.  438,  439). 


90  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

ing  to  apxn  —  with  some  of  the  older  interpreters  — 
the  meaning  eternity,  we  think  tliat  the  idea  is  in- 
volved in  the  passages  which  we  have  noticed,  as  well 
as  demanded  by  other  assertions  of  the  apostle  con- 
cerning the  Word.^ 

John's  next  proposition  concerning  the  Logos  is 
that  he  existed  in  intimate  fellowship  with  God  QkoL 
0  Xoyo'i  rjv  7rpb<i  tov  Oeov,  i.  1).  The  force  of  the 
preposition  Trpo?  may  be  partially  indicated  by  the 
very  unidiomatic  English  rendering:  "  The  Word 
was  toivard  God."  The  preposition  expresses  more 
than  irapd  would  do  (t/.  xvii.  5.).  It  emphasizes  a 
direction  or  tendency  of  life.  The  moral  movement 
of  his  life  is  centred  in  God,  and  ever  goes  out 
toward  God.  The  bond  of  this  essential  fellowship 
is  love,  since  the  Father  loved  the  Son  "  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world"  (xvii.  24).  A  similar 
thought  is  probably  intended  in  the  words,  "  which 
is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father  "  (6  wv  ew  rbv  koXttov 
TOV  Trarpo?,  i.  18).  Some  interpreters  understand 
these  words  to  be  spoken  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  writer  at  the  time,  and  therefore  to  refer  to  the 
exaltation  of  Jesus. ^  But  the  point  of  the  passage 
is  to  show  how  the  Son  is  fitted  to  reveal  God  to 
mankind,  and  it  is  his  essential  and  eternal  relation 
to  the  Father  which  would  constitute  the  ground  of 
that  fitness.     The  declaration  of  the  Father  referred 

1  "For  'before  the  world  was,'  a  philosophical  writer  would 
have  said  'from  eternity.'"    Beyschlag,  Neuiest.  TheoL,  ii.  427. 

2  So  Meyer,  Commentary,  in  loco  ;  Weiss,  JoJiann.  Lehrb.,  p.  239. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       91 

to  in  i^rjiyrjaaro,  is  that  which  the  Son  has  made  in 
his  incarnation.  His  fitness  to  make  that  revelation 
must  therefore  be  logically  grounded  in  his  pre-incar- 
nate  relation  to  the  Father  (roy  deov')  to  which  alone 
can  the  words  6  wv  et<?  tov  koXttov  naturally  refer.^ 
Here,  too,  the  use  of  the  preposition  (etV),  indicating 
motion  or  direction,  should  be  observed,  suggesting 
an  "  active  and  living  relation "  (Godet)  between 
the  Son  and  the  Father. 

To  the  assertion  of  the  pre-existence  of  the  Logos 
and  of  his  abiding  fellowship  with  God,  John  now  adds: 
"  and  the  Word  was  God  (/cat  0e6^  rjv  6  Xoyo'?,  i.  1). 
0eo9  is  here  emphatically  prefixed  because  the  stress 
of  the  thought  lies  upon  the  divine  nature  of  the 
Logos,  and  is  without  the  article  because  John  will 
not  absolutely  identify  o  Xojo'i  and  6  ^eo?.  To  do 
this  would  be  to  contradict  the  previous  sentence 
where  a  distinction  is  presupposed  between  6  A.0709 
and  0  0e6^  (the  Father).  John  here  uses  6  ^eo?  to 
denote  specifically  the  Father  —  the  central  seat  and 
fountain  of  divinity  —  and  ^eo?  to  denote  the  category 
of  divine  nature  or  essence  in  which  the  Son,  equally 
with  the  Father,  partakes.  He  thus  affirms  a  dis- 
tinction of  persons,  but  an  identity  of  essence,  be- 
tween the  Logos  and  the  Father.  That  this  is  the 
import  of  the  apostle's  words  is  generally  admitted 
by  candid  interpreters,  whatever  adjustment  they 
may  make  of  the  fact  with   theological   speculation. 

1  So  Liicke,  De  Wette,  Godet,  Westcott  (Commentaries,  in 
loco). 


92  THE  JOHANNINE   T1IE0L(3GY 

'  Writers  who,  like  Ritschl  ^  and  Bcyschlag,^  suppose 
the  Logos  to  denote  a  principle  or  impulse  in  God,  or 
a  pretemporal  purpose  of  God  to  reveal  himself  in  a 
person,  appeal  in  support  of  their  views  rather  to  what 
they  regard  as  the  practical,  non-speculative  purpose 
of  the  prologue  than  to  the  simple,  immediate  import 
of  the  words.  Liicke's  objections  to  the  usual  inter- 
pretation are  untenable.^  He  says,  for  example,  that, 
if  ^e6<?  rjv  6  Xoyo^  wns  intended  to  emphasize  the  unitT/ 
of  essence  as  an  offset  to  the  distinction  of  persons 
implied  in  6  Xo'709  rju  irpb^  top  deov,  an  adversative 
particle  (^aWd  or  Se  ),  and  not  the  simple  connective 
Kat,  would  have  been  required.  To  this  the  answer 
is,  in  part,  that  it  is  the  commonest  peculiarity  of 
John's  style  to  string  sentences  together,  in  Hebrais- 
tic fashion,  by  the  simple  connective,  and,  further, 
that  the  apostle's  thought  does  not  require  him  to 
set  these  statements  in  contrast,  but  in  unity.  His 
assertion  that  the  common  view  would  necessitate 
the  article  with  Oeo^  to  correspond  to  irpo^  rov  6e6v, 
overlooks  the  natural  and  intentional  difference  be- 
tween 6  0e6<;  and  ^eo'?.  This  author  weakens  ^eo'9  to 
the  sense  of  Philo's  phrase  6  Sevrepo'i  Oeo^  which  he 
applied  to  the  Logos  by  accommodation.  Liicke's 
conclusion  is  that  the  sense  is  nearly  the  same  as 
if  John  had  defined  the  Logos  as  6e2o<i,  and  that  the 
words  ^eo?  ■^v  6  X070?  do  not  add  a  new  thought  to 

^  Rechfferdgung  unci  Versohnung,  iii.  378  sq. 
2  Neutesl.  TheoL,  ii.  427. 
'  Commentary,  in  loco. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       93 

the  two  previously  expressed,  but  only  further  define 
and  explain  the  relation  denoted  by  Trpo?  t6u  deov. 
This  interpretation  unwarrantably  allows  the  natural 
force  of  John's  words  to  be  overborne  by  the  assump 
tion  of  a  close  resemblance  between  John's  idea  of  the 
Logos  and  that  of  Philo. 

•The  creation  of  the  world  is  ascribed  to  the  Logos 
(irdvra  hi  avrov  iyeuero,  k.  t.  X.,  i.  3,  10).  It  will  be 
noticed  that  it  is  a  mediate  function  (Sm')  in  creation 
which  is  here  designated.  Nothing  came  into  being 
apart  from  him  (%<wfi9  aviov).  h\  this  respect  the 
theology  of  John  accords  with  the  representations  of 
other  New  Testament  writers,  for  example,  with  that 
of  Paul:  "Li  him  (eV  uvtm')  were  all  things  created," 
etc. ;  "  All  things  have  been  created  through  him  (hi 
avTov)  and  unto  him  (et?  aurov^  ;  and  he  is  before 
all  things  and  in  him  all  things  consist"  (Col.  i.  16, 
17).  In  Hebrews  also  the  writer  speaks  of  the  Son 
"through  whom  (Si'  ov)  God  made  the  worlds,"  and 
who  "  upholds  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power  " 
(i.  2,  3).  God  is  the  Creator  in  the  absolute  sense, 
but  the  Logos  is  the  co-efficient  agent  of  God  in 
creating,  sustaining,  and  governing  the  world.  It  is 
thus  a  matter  of  interest  to  observe  that  John,  as 
well  as  Paul,  has  the  idea  of  "the  cosmic  significance 
of  Christ,"  —  an  idea  which  sustains  an  important 
relation  to  his  doctrines  of  revelation  and  redemption. 

The  fifth  and  final  thought  of  the  introductory 
passage  (i.  1-5),  which  may  be  called  the  prologue 
in  the  narrower  sense,  is  that  the  Logos  is  the  giver 


94  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  life  or  dispenser  of  light  to  men  (i.  4,  5).  The 
Logos  is  the  agent  of  divine  revelation,  — the  mediator 
of  spiritual  life  to  mankind  universally.  He  is  the 
seat  and  source  of  life,  which  he  communicates  to 
men.  This  life  is  defined  under  the  figure  of  light 
in  order  to  emphasize  its  diffusive  and  beneficent 
character  and  power.  This  light  has  been  pouring 
itself  forth  upon  the  sinful  and  unreceptive  world 
in  all  ages. 

The  remainder  of  the  prologue  may  be  regarded  as 
an  illustration  and  amplification  of  this  thought,  drawn 
from  the  historical  manifestation  of  the  Logos  in  Jesus 
Christ.  From  the  sixth  verse  onward  the  writer  makes 
the  incarnation  and  life  of  Jesus  his  ruling  thought. 
John  the  Baptist  —  the  last  representative  of  the  old 
covenant  and  the  herald  of  the  new  —  testified  that 
Jesus  was  the  true  divine  light  of  the  world  (6-9). 
As  participating  in  the  world's  creation  he  has  an 
abiding  relation  to  it.  He  was  perpetually  active  (i7v) 
in  the  world  as  the  revealer  of  God,  but  the  world 
received  not  his  revelation  (10).  At  length  he  came 
{rjXdev')  in  his  incarnation  to  his  own  proper  possession 
(ei<?  TO,  rSta),  the  Jewish  nation,  but  those  who  were, 
in  the  divine  destination,  his  own  people  (ot  iSioi'), 
acting  in  their  free  self-determination,  rejected  him 
(11).  Such  as  did  receive  him,  however,  entered  by 
faith  in  him  into  a  new  world  of  blessedness  in  loving 
fellowship  with  the  Father  (12, 13).  The  main  thoughts 
which  are  here  indicated  respecting  divine  revelation 
are :   (1)   Revelation  is    universal ;  the   light   of   the 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       95 

eternal  Logos  shines  in  the  world's  darkness,  seeking 
to  bless  and  save  men.  (2)  It  is  the  sinfulness  of 
men  which  blinds  their  minds  to  the  true  knowledge 
of  God  and  prevents  them  from  realizing  the  blessed- 
ness of  fellowship  with  God.  (3)  In  the  incarnation  of 
the  Logos  a  special  revelation  was  made  to  the  Jews, 
in  whose  whole  history  God  had  been  seeking  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  the  reception  of  the  Messiah  when 
he  should  come.  (4)  While  as  a  nation  the  Jews, 
who  thus,  in  a  peculiar  sense,  belonged  to  Christ,  re- 
jected him,  he  was  accepted  by  others  on  conditions 
purely  spiritual ;  and  these  have  attained  the  end  con- 
templated in  all  revelation,  —  loving  obedience  and 
fellowship  with  God. 

The  final  section  of  the  prologue  (14-18)  introduces 
no  strictly  new  thoughts.  John  affirms  that  the  Logos 
became  incarnate  (6  X0709  aap^  ejeDero,  14),  and  that 
he  dwelt  in  humanity  as  in  a  tabernacle  (ia-Krjvoia-ev  iv 
'^ixiv,  14).  The  word  adp^  denotes  human  nature,  and 
not  a  human  body  (a-co/xa)  merely.  The  verb  iyevero 
cannot,  in  view  of  John's  whole  doctrine,  be  understood 
to  mean  that  the  Logos  changed  his  nature  and  became 
human  in  the  sense  of  ceasing  to  be  divine.  The  sen- 
tence 0  X0709  crap^  iyevero  expresses  with  pregnant 
brevity  the  idea  of  his  assumption  of  human  nature  by 
union  with  which  the  divine-human  personality  is 
constituted.  We  must  understand  this  formula  in  the 
light  of  the  explanatory  words  :  "  and  tabernacled 
among  us"  (i.  14),  and  of  expressions  like  iv  crapKi 
rp-^eadai  (I.iv.  2  ;  II.  7)  as  denoting  the  mysterious  unity 


96  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  divinity  with  humanity  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ. 
In  his  person,  "  full  of  grace  and  truth  "  (14),  the  glory 
of  God  —  his  holy  perfections  —  stood  revealed  to 
men.  Again  the  Baptist's  testimony  is  quoted : 
Although  Jesus  came  after  me  in  time  he  has  taken 
rank  before  me  in  the  dignity  of  his  work  (eixirpoadev 
/jlov  ryeyovev,  15),  because  he  existed  before  me  (Trpwr6<i 
fjLov  rjv,  15).  We  became  sharers,  continues  the  apostle, 
in  the  plenitude  of  divine  blessing  which  came  to  the 
world  in  Christ,  and,  in  consequence,  one  gift  of  grace 
has  succeeded  another  (%«/>tt'  avrl  ')(^dpno'i^  16).  He 
closes  by  hinting  at  the  greater  fulness  of  revelation 
through  the  incarnation  in  comparison  with  that  made 
in  Old  Testament  times.  The  revelation  made  through 
Moses  —  from  which  the  activity  of  the  Logos  must 
not  be  supposed  to  have  been  absent  —  was  a  revela- 
tion of  law  which,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  could 
make  only  a  very  partial  manifestation  of  God.  Com- 
mandments and  prohibitions  are  extrinsic  to  God,  and 
furnish,  at  best,  but  partial  disclosures  of  his  will  and 
nature.  But  in  Christ  revelation  became  personal. 
God  came  close  to  men  in  a  life  which  revealed  the 
very  heart  of  God  to  them,  and,  while  he  still  remained 
hidden  to  the  senses,  lie  was  declared  in  his  essence 
and  disposition  by  the  Son,  who  in  his  essential  life  is 
in  perpetual  and  perfect  fellowship  with  tbe  Father. 

A  comparison  of  the  Logos-idea,  as  thus  developed, 
with  that  of  Philo,  will  reveal  similarities  of  form  with 
striking  and  essential  differences  of  content.  The 
Logos  of  John,  like  that  of   Philo,  is  the  mediator 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       97 

between   the   absolute   God  and  the  world,  but   the 
motive  for  the  mediation  in  the  two  systems  is  funda- 
mentally   different.     In  Philo  the  motive   lies   in   a 
certain  philosophical  view  of  the  world  and  of  God. 
The  world  is  gross  and  evil,  and  the  transcendent  God 
can  hold  no  direct  relations  with  it.      God  comes  into 
relation  with  the  world  only  mediately  through  the 
Logos.     Thus  the  motive  for   the  Logos-doctrine   in 
Philo  is  found  in  a  metaphysical  view  of  the  universe. 
With   John    the  motive  is    historical.     The   fact   of 
divine  revelation  in  Jesus  Christ  is  the  logical  starting- 
point  of  the  Johannine  theology.     For  John,  God  is 
also  transcendent,  but  his  transcendence  is  ethical,  not 
metaphysical.     For  him  the  world  is  separated  from 
God,  but  this  separation  is  due,  not  to  the  constitution 
of  the  world,  but  to  its  sinfulness.     Philo's  system 
rests   upon  a  metaphysical  dualism  inherent    in   the 
universe ;  John's  doctrine  proceeds  upon  the  idea  of 
an  ethical  dualism,  incidental  to  the  system  and  arising 
from  human  sin.     The  Logos-doctrine  is  not  adopted 
and  shaped  by  John  —  as  by  Philo  —  as  a  means  of 
solving  the  difficulties  inherent  in  a  certain  philosophy, 
but  is  adopted  as  a  convenient  and  useful  method  of 
presenting  the  fact  that  the  pre-existent  Son  of  God 
became  incarnate  in  Jesus  Christ.     John  in  the  pro- 
logue seeks  to  present  to  his  readers,  under  the  terms 
of  a  doctrine  which  was  current   among  them,  two 
truths  concerning  Jesus  :  (1)  the  fact  of  his  saving 
historical  work,  whose  blessing  he  had  himself  experi- 
enced ;  and  (2)  the  fact  of  his  personal  pre-existence 

7 


98  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

and  essential  unity  with  the  Father,  to  which  Jesus  had 
testified  in  his  teaching  concerning  himself. 

Again,  in  John  we  have  what  is  not  found  in 
Philo,  —  a  clear  and  consistent  personification  of  the 
Logos.  In  Philo  the  use  of  the  word  oscillates  be- 
tween the  two  common  meanings  of  the  term,  reason 
and  word.  The  Logos,  considered  as  the  immanent 
reason  of  God,  is  a  name  for  an  element  or  phase  of 
the  personality  of  the  absolute  Being,  while  the  Logos, 
in  the  sense  of  the  uttered  Word  of  God,  is  treated 
as  a  distinct  hypostasis.  These  two  quite  different 
senses  of  the  term  are  not  clearly  distinguished. 
The  word  is  thus  involved  in  vague  and  shifting 
senses.  Moreover,  the  relation  of  Philo's  philosophy 
to  Old  Testament  and  later  Jewish  thought,  enhances 
the  uncertainty  of  its  meaning.  Many  of  Philo's  titles 
for  the  Logos,  —  the  Wisdom  of  God,  the  Son  of  God, 
the  Archangel,  the  Man  of  God,  etc.,  —  seem  to  be 
reproductions  of  Jewish  conceptions  which  may  be 
understood  figuratively  or  poetically.  But  in  John 
the  identification  of  the  Logos  with  the  person  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  clear  assertion  of  his  pretem- 
poral  existence  and  of  his  deity,  make  it  impossible, 
without  exegetical  arbitrariness,  to  interpret  his  lan- 
guage in  a  mere  ideal  or  poetical  sense. 

From  what  has  been  said  of  the  differing  motives 
of  the  Logos-doctrine  in  John  and  in  Pliilo,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  idea  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos 
would  ])e  radically  inconsistent  with  Philo's  whole 
system.     The  divine  Logos  could  form  no  union  with 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  LOGOS       99 

weak  and  corruptible  human  nature.  The  words  o 
\6yo<i  aap^  ijevero,  (i.  14)  mark  a  fundamental  differ- 
ence between  John's  doctrine  and  Philo's.  There  are 
no  presuppositions  in  the  apostle's  thought  which  con- 
stitute a  barrier  to  the  idea  of  a  union  of  divinity  with 
humanity.  In  fact  he  has  had  personal  knowledge  of 
such  a  union  in  the  person  of  his  Master,  in  whom 
the  divine  life  has  been  manifested  (I.  i.  1,  2).  John's 
doctrine  is  grounded  thus,  not  in  abstract  specula- 
tion, but  in  observation  and  experience.  His  fel- 
lowship with  his  Master  and  his  knowledge  of  his 
teaching  and  claims  are  the  grounds  on  which  he 
builds  his  doctrine  of  the  nature,  incarnation,  and 
historical  function  of  the  Logos. 

While  we  thus  recognize  a  historic  relation  between 
Alexandrian  speculation  as  represented  in  Philo,  and 
John's  Logos-doc  trine,!  we  think  the  differences  much 
more  fundamental  than  the  resemblances.  If  this  is 
the  case,  it  raises  a  strong  presumption  against  the 
opinion  ^  that  the  Logos-idea  is  the  starting-point  and 
controlling  thought  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  In  this 
view  it  is  regarded  as  the  aim  of  the  Gospel  to  exhibit 
the  various  stages  of  a  conflict  between  light  and 
darkness  (i.  4,  5,  7,  9 ;  iii.  19-21 ;  viii.  12  ;  ix.  5 ; 
xii.  35,  36,  46).  The  Gospel  is  a  highly  wrought  de- 
scription of  the  meeting  of  opposing  powers  which 

1  The  resemblances  in  phraseology  and  idea  are  exhibited  in 
detail  in  Siegfried's  Philo  von  Alexandria,  pp.  317-321. 

2  See,  e.  g.,  Weizsacker,  Das  apostol.  Zeitalter,  p.  553  ;  O.  Holtz- 
mann,  Das  Joliannesevangelium,  pp.  78,  79. 


100  THE  jaHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

are  represented  by  the  Logos  and  the  sinful  world 
respectively.  This  abstract,  philosophical  conception 
which  the  writer  adopted  when  he  appropriated  to  his 
use  the  term  Logos  determines  his  whole  representa- 
tion of  the  life  of  Jesus,  and  gives  to  it  a  distinctively 
speculative  cast.  Philo  furnished  the  fourth  evange- 
list, concludes  Oscar  Holtzmann,  with  "  an  essentially 
new  conception  of  Christianity."  ^ 

The  phenomena  of  the  Gospel  do  not  appear  to  me 
to  sustain  this  view.  The  term  Logos,  as  a  personal 
designation,  does  not  occur  outside  of  the  prologue, 
and  even  there  is  treated  historically,  rather  than 
philosophically.  The  Logos  is  not  presented  as  an 
abstract  principle,  but  as  the  pretemporal  form  of  the 
person  Jesus  Christ.  Light  and  darkness  in  the  pro- 
logue, and  in  the  Gospel  elsewhere,  are  not  abstract 
metaphysical  conceptions,  but  ethical  conceptions. 
Darkness  is  sin,  and  light  is  goodness.  These  terms  are 
symbols  of  ethical  realities,  the  use  of  which  accords 
with  the  writer's  peculiar  mode  of  thought  respecting 
the  nature  of  God  and  of  man,  and  which  abound  in 
the  First  Epistle  (i.  5,  7  ;  ii.  8-10)  where  the  Logos- 
doctrine  is  not  developed  and,  in  the  view  of  many, 
is  not  even  referred  to  (see  I.  i.  1,  irepl  rod  Xojov  Tr]<{ 
^corj<;).  The  writer's  own  account  of  his  purpose  in 
composing  the  Gospel  is :  "  These  (signs)  are  written, 
that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God;  and  that  believing  ye  may  have  life  in  his 
name  "  (xx.  31).     His  purpose  was  strictly  historical 

^  Op.  cit.,  p.  79. 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE  LOGOS  101 

and  practical.  The  saving  good  that  has  come  to  the 
world  is  found  in  the  person  and  work  of  Jesus,  who 
declared  himself  to  have  existed  in  essential  union 
with  God  before  his  human  appearance.  To  empha- 
size this  pre-existence  and  union  witli  God,  and  to 
present  the  thought  that,  as  the  etc/nal  Son,  Jesus 
was  the  medium  of  divine  revelation  in  all  ages,  John 
employs  the  term  Logos. 

Harnack  concludes  his  discussion  of  the  relation  of 
the  prologue  to  the  Gospel  as  a  whole,  in  these  words  : 

"  The  prologue  of  the  Gospel  is  not  the  key  to  the 
understanding  of  the  Gospel,  but  it  prepares  the  Hellen- 
istic readers  therefor.  The  writer  seizes  upon  a  known 
quantity,  the  Logos,  works  it  over  and  transforms  it  — 
implicitly  combating  false  Christologies  —  in  order  to 
substitute  for  it  Jesus  Christ,  the  ixovoyevy]<i  Oe6^,  that  is, 
in  order  to  disclose  it  as  being  this  same  Jesus  Christ. 
From  the  moment  when  this  is  done,  the  Logos-idea  is 
allowed  to  fall  away.  The  author  continues  his  narrative 
now  only  concerning  Jesus,  in  order  to  establish  the  faith 
that  he  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God.  This  belief  has 
for  its  principal  element  the  recognition  tliat  Jesus  origi- 
nates from  God  and  from  heaven  ;  but  tlie  author  is  far 
removed  from  the  purpose  of  securing  this  recognition 
from  cosmological  and  philosophical  considerations.  Upon 
the  basis  of  his  testimony,  and  because  he  has  brought 
full  knowledge  of  God  and  life  —  absolutely  heavenly, 
divine  benefits  —  does  Jesus  prove  himself,  according  to 
the  evangelist,  to  be  the  Messiah,  the  Sou  of  God."  ^ 

1  Op.  cit.,  pp.  230,  23L  I  do  not  intend  by  this  citation  to 
indicate  my  accord  with  Harnack's  general  estimate  of  the 
Logos-idea  iu  the  Fourtli  Gospel. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE   UNION   OF   THE   SON   WITH    THE   FATHER 

Literature.  — Weiss  :  JoJiann.  Lehrb.,  Die  Einheitdes  Sohnes 
mit  dem  Vater,  u.  s.  w.,  pp.  203-219,  and  Bibl.  TheoL,  The  Christ- 
ology,  §§  143-145;  Wendt:  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  The  Rela- 
tion of  Jesus  to  God,  and  Pre-existence  of  Jesus  according  to  the 
Johannine  Discourses,  ii.  151-178  (orig.,  pp.  450-472) ;  From- 
mann:  Johann.  Lehrb.,  Sohn  Gottes,  pp.  409-418;  Beyschlag  : 
Neatest.  TheoL,  Der  Eingeborene,  ii.  409-420 ;  H.  P.  Liddon  : 
The  Divinity  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  Lecture  V., 
The  Doctrine  of  Christ's  Divinity  in  the  Writings  of  St.  John, 
pp.  209-278. 

Some  of  the  most  important  considerations  which 
bear  upon  the  present  subject  have  come  under  our 
notice  in  the  study  of  the  Logos-idea.  It  remains  to 
examine  the  apostle's  teaching  as  a  whole  in  the  light 
of  the  Christologj  of  the  prologue,  in  order  to  de- 
termine whether  or  not  the  ideas  there  found  are  per- 
vading and  fundamental  in  the  Johannine  view  of 
Christ's  person.  This  inquiry  will  involve  chiefly  a 
study  of  the  terms  the  Son  of  God  and  the  only  he- 
gotten  Son,  and  an  examination  of  those  passages 
which  refer  to  the  pre-existence  of  the  Son  and  to 
his  relation  to  the  Father. 

The  title  the  Son  of  Crod,  or  its  shortened  form  the 
Son,  is  applied  to  Jesus  about  thirty  times  in  the 


UNION  OF  THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     103 

Gospel,  and  more  than  twenty  times  in  the  Epistles 
of  John.  In  a  few  passages  the  title  is  modified  by 
the  word  only-hegotten  {ixovoyevTj'i^  (i.  14,  18  ;  iii.  16, 
18;  I.  iv.  9).  It  is  necessary  to  determine,  if  pos- 
sible, what  this  title  signifies.  The  principal  problem 
is,  whether  the  term  Son  refers  merely  to  an  ethical 
union  of  Christ  with  God,  or  also  denotes  or  implies 
a  metaphysical  union ;  whether  it  simply  describes 
Christ  as  the  chosen  object  of  the  divine  love,  or  also 
designates  him  as  standing  in  essential  and  eternal 
union  with  the  Father  in  respect  to  his  nature. 

No  one  can  read  the  passages  in  the  Gospel  of 
John  where  Jesus  speaks  of  his  filial  relation  to  God 
without  receiving  the  impression  that  this  relation  is  re- 
garded as  something  unique,  —  that  he  is  declared  to 
be  the  Son  of  God  in  some  pre-eminent  sense.  Take, 
in  illustration,  such  passages  as  these  :  "  The  Father 
loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things  into  his 
hand"  (iii.  35).  "Not  that  any  man  hath  seen  the 
Father,  save  he  which  is  from  God,  he  hath  seen 
the  Father"  (vi.  46).  "I  and  the  Father  are  one  " 
(x.  30).  "I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in 
me"  (xiv.  11).  The  question  now  arises  whether 
this  unique  relation  to  which  these  passages  refer  is 
solely  ethical,  that  is,  a  relation  of  loving  fellowship, 
and  thus  the  same  in  kind  with  that  in  which  all 
men  as  "  sons  of  God "  stand  to  God,  or  whether  a 
relationship  of  essence  is  also  involved.  Weiss  has 
adopted  the  former  view  in  respect  to  the  meaning  of 
Son.     In  his  opinion  the  term  Son  of  Grod  describes 


104  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Jesus  "  as  the  object  of  the  divine  love,  upon  whom 
the  good  pleasure  of  God  rests."  ^  This  author,  how- 
ever, holds,  in  general,  that  the  pre-existence  of  Christ 
and  the  metaphysical  union  of  essence  between  Christ 
and  God  are  taught  in  the  writings  of  John,^  But 
he  maintains  that  these  ideas  are  not  involved  in 
the  title  So7i  of  God,  which  is  an  Old  Testament 
metaphor  derived  from  human  relations,  and  with 
which  is  sometimes  joined  the  designation  "  only-be- 
gotten "  in  ordei'  to  emphasize  "  the  closest  relation 
of  love "  existing  between  the  Father  and  the  Son.^ 
But  this  author  holds  that  on  the  question  "  whether 
this  [sonship]  reaches  back  into  eternity  and  depends 
upon  an  original  relationship  of  essence  on  the  part 
of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  the  self-testimony  of  Jesus 
could  give  no  disclosure."  *  Other  recent  writers 
seek,  in  connection  with  this  view  of  the  sonship  of 
Jesus,  to  rule  out  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  idea  of 
a  personal  pre-existence  of  the  Son.^ 

The  title  Son  of  Grod  was  not  in  current  use  among 
the  Jews  as  a   designation  for  the  Messiah.      It  is, 

1  Bibl.   Theol,  §  17,  b. 

2  Weiss  admits  that  "  the  Johannean  self-testimony  of  Jesus 
decisively  goes  beyond  that  of  the  Synoptists,"  an"d  holds  that 
passages  like  xvii.  5  and  viii.  58  denote  "  an  existence  which  ex- 
cludes all  becoming,"  and  point  to  "  a  pre-historical  existence 
with  the  Father."  Ih.  144,  a. 

3  lb.  §  145,  a. 

4  lb.  §  17,  c,  note  3. 

5  For  example,  Beyschlag,  Neutest.  Theol.,  ii.  412  sq.  and 
417  sq.  ;  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  151  sq.  (orig.  p.  450  sq.). 


UNION  OF   THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     105 

indeed,  found  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  (cv.  2),  and  in  the 
Fourth  Book  of  Esdras  (vii.  28  sq. ;  xiii.  37  sq. ;  xiv.  9), 
where  Jehovah  is  represented  as  calling  the  Messiah 
his  Son ;  but  these  passages  are  only  reminiscences 
of  the  Old  Testament  conception  of  Israel,  and  espe- 
cially of  Israel's  king,  as  God's  Son.  From  extra- 
Biblical  sources  we  derive  no  light  upon  the  meaning 
of  the  title  as  applied  to  the  Messiah.  It  is  probable 
that  our  Lord's  application  of  the  term  to  himself 
stands  historically  connected  with  the  Old  Testament 
representations  to  which  we  have  just  referred.  In 
2  Sam.  vii.  14  we  read:  "I  will  be  his  (David's) 
father,  and  he  shall  be  my  son  ; "  and  in  Hosea  xi.  1 ; 
"  When  Israel  was  a  child,  then  I  loved  him,  and 
called  my  son  out  of  Egypt."  As  the  ideal  theocratic 
Son  of  God,  the  antitypical  King  of  Israel,  Jesus 
applies  to  himself  the  term  Son  in  order  to  designate 
the  unique  relation  in  which  he  stands  to  God.  The 
name  stands  closely  connected  with  the  title  Messiah, 
but  is  not  strictly  synonymous  with  it.  In  Peter's 
confession  they  are  united  :  "  Thou  art  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  the  living  God  "  (Matt.  xvi.  16).  In  like 
manner  the  titles  are  several  times  coupled  together 
by  others,  as  by  the  high  priest  (Matt.  xxvi.  63),  by 
Martha  (John  xi.  27)  and  by  the  apostle  John  (xx.  31). 
But  these  passages  -do  not  prove  more  than  that  son- 
ship  to  God  was  an  attribute  of  the  Messiah  and  a 
prerequisite  of  his  work.  The  Messianic  title  of  Jesus 
remains  XjOicrro'?.  The  title  jSon  of  God  desig- 
nates the  personal,  rather  than  the  official,  character 


106  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

and  relations  of  Jesus.  It  refers  not  so  much  to  the 
work  to  which  he  has  been  appointed  as  to  the  rela- 
tion to  God  which  that  work  presupposes.  The 
Messianic  work  of  Jesus  is  grounded  in  his  sonship 
to  God. 

It  is  necessary,  now,  to  examine  the  more  signifi- 
cant passages  from  the  Gospel  in  which  this  term  is 
used,  in  order  to  determine  what  peculiarities  of  the 
person  of  Christ  it  is  intended  to  describe.  The  first 
question  to  which  an  answer  must  be  sought  is, 
whether  the  name  Son^  as  applied  to  Christ,  refers 
only  to  his  historic  life  on  earth,  or  also  points, 
directly  or  inferentially,  to  a  pretemporal  existence 
and  thus  to  an  eternal  relation  on  his  part  to  the 
Father. 

Christ  is  twice  referred  to  in  the  prologue  as  the 
only  begotten  Son  (i.  14,  18).  In  the  first  of  these 
passages  it  is  uncertain  whether  he  is  directly  called 
"  the  only  begotten  from  the  Father"  (A.  V.,  R.  V.), 
or  is  only  compared  to  a  father's  only  begotten  son. 
The  absence  of  the  article  from  the  words  only-hegot- 
ten  and  Father  (cJ?  /jiovo<yevov<i  irapa  Trarpo^)  favors  the 
rendering:  "  An  only  begotten  from  a  father"  (R.  Y. 
marg.).  On  this  view  the  words  designate  Jesus  as 
the  One  on  whom  God  concentrates  his  special  love 
and  favor,  as  an  earthly  father  would  concentrate  his 
love  upon  an  only  son.  So  far,  the  view  which  re- 
gards the  sonship  in  question  as  an  ethical  relation 
seems  to  meet  the  requirements  of  this  passage.  But 
the  glory  (^86^a)  which  has  been  manifested  is  cer- 


UNION   OF   THE   SON  WITH   THE   FATHER     107 

tainly  regarded,  as  the  whole  import  of  the  prologue 
shows,  as  belonging  to  this  Son  and  as  inhering  in  his 
person,  before  its  manifestation  in  his  incarnate  form 
of  being.  He  does  not  become  at  Son  by  his  incarna- 
tion, as  men  by  faith  become  children  of  God  (i.  12). 
He  brought  to  manifestation  in  his  incarnation  "  the 
glory  which  he  had"  with  the  Father  "before  the 
world  was"  (xvii.  5). 

The  bearing  upon  our  subject  of  the  second  of  these 
passages  (i.  18),  "No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any 
time ;  the  only  begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him,"  is  partly  de- 
pendent upon  its  interpretation.  If  the  participle 
wv  is  referred  to  the  time  when  the  author  is  writing,^ 
the  passage  would  then  be  an  assertion  of  the  exalt- 
ation of  the  Son  into  closest  fellowship  with  the 
Father,  but  would  contain  no  reference  to  his  pre-ex- 
istence,  and  would  therefore  have  no  bearing  upon  the 
question  whether  the  idea  of  pre-existence  was  here 
associated  with  the  phrase  "  the  only  begotten  Son." 
On  the  other  hand,  if  this  participle  be  given  the 
force  of  an  imperfect,^  the  passage  would  assert  that 
the  only  begotten  Son  was,  in  his  pre-incarnate  life, 
in  closest  fellowship  with  the  Fatlier,  and  that  he  had 
left  this  position  in  order  to  reveal  God  to  men.  On 
a  third  interpretation,  which  seems  to  me  preferable, 
the  participle  wv  is  a  timeless  present,  and  the  pas- 
sage would  designate  the  only  begotten  Son  as  in 
a  continuous,   abiding    fellowsliip    of    life   with   the 

1  So  Meyer,  Weiss.  2  So  Bengel,  Gess. 


108  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Father.  He  is,  even  in  his  earthly  life,  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  even  as  the  Son  of  man  is  said  to  be 
"  in  heaven  "  (iii.  13)  because  heaven  is  the  sphere  to 
which  he  belongs.^  On  either  of  these  last  two 
views  the  term  "  onlj-begotten  Son  "  carries  with  it 
the  idea  of  personal  pre-existence  and  clearly  implies 
a  unique  relation  of  Jesus  to  God. 

Upon  the  reading  fxovoyevr]^  9e6<i  (God  only  begot- 
ten) in  i,  18,  which  is  now  widely  adopted  among 
scholars,  instead  of  o  fjUovoyevr)<i  vl6<i,  our  passage 
would  still  have  an  important  bearing  upon  the 
general  subject  of  John's  conception  of  our  Lord's 
person,  but  not  upon  the  special  question  now  under 
consideration,  whether  Son  of  God  involves  only  an 
ethical,  or,  in  addition,  an  essential  relation  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  God.  For  these  two  readings  the  evidence 
is  —  all  things  considered  —  very  evenly  balanced.^ 
While  the  preponderance  of  external  testimony  may 
be  regarded  as  favoring  /jbovojevrj'i  6e6<i,  considerations 
of  internal  probability  reinforce  in  no  small  degree 
the  evidence  for  the  other  text.  The  expression 
Ciod  only  begotten  occurs  nowhere  else,  and,  while 
the   fact  that  the  Logos   is   called   6e6<i  in  the  pro- 

1  So  Tholuck,  Westcott. 

2  For  a  very  full  exhibit  of  the  evidence  on  both  sides,  see 
Dr.  Ezra  Abbot,  On  the  reading  "  only  begotten  God,"  in  his 
Critical  Essays,  p.  241  sq. ;  also  briefer  summaries,  with  refer- 
ences to  the  literature  of  the  subject,  in  Westcott  and  Hort's 
Greek  Testament,  vol.  ii.,  and  in  Westcott's  Commentary.  Dr. 
Abbot  favors  the  reading  6  ixovoyephs  vlos ;  Drs.  Westcott  and 
Hort  adopt  fiovoyevfjS  Oeos- 


UNION   OF   THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     109 

logue  weakens  in  some  degree  the  presumption  against 
this  reading,  it  is  possible  that  the  words  koI  6e6<i  tjv  6 
Xo'709  may  serve  to  explain  how  the  usual  expression 
0  fiovoyevTj'i  vl6<i  might  the  more  readily  be  changed 
by  copyists  into  (6)  fjiovoy€vr)<i  de6<i.  Since,  therefore, 
we  have  to  do  in  this  passage  both  with  a  doubtful 
text  and  with  an  uncertain  interpretation,  our  conclu- 
sion must  be  a  cautious  one,  but  we  think  the  proba- 
bilities favor  the  view  that  this  passage  designates 
the  only  begotten  Son  as  standing  in  close,  perpetual 
intimacy  with  the  Father.  If  so,  then  the  two  pas- 
sages reviewed  would,  taken  together,  describe  the 
glory  of  the  pre- existent  Son  dwelling  in  abiding 
union  with  the  Father.  But  what  the  nature  of  this 
glory  and  of  this  union  is,  may  still  be  regarded  as 
undefined. 

The  great  majority  of  the  passages  where  the  Son 
is  spoken  of  are  indecisive  and  cannot  be  shown  to 
involve,  in  themselves,  more  than  the  ethical  relation 
of  Jesus  to  God.  When,  for  example,  it  is  said  that 
"  the  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things 
into  his  hand"  etc.  (iii.  35),  the  nature  of  the  rela- 
tion is  not  explicitly  defined.  In  the  connection, 
however,  we  find  the  coming  of  the  Son  from  heaven 
referred  to  and  the  statement  that  he  is  "  above  all " 
(iii.  31).  While  it  cannot  justly  be  claimed  that  the 
term  Son  is  used  in  such  passages  in  the  hypostatic 
sense,  it  must  be  admitted  that  there  is  coupled 
with  it  the  idea  of  his  pre-existence  and  of  his  pre-emi- 
nence as  representing  the  authority  of  God.     In  the 


no       THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

two  remaining  passages  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  where 
Christ  is  called  "the  only  begotten  Son"  (iii.  16,18), 
it  is  not  clear  that  the  phrase  refers  to  a  metaphysical 
relation  of  essence.  Yet  the  sending  of  "  the  only 
begotten  Son  "  is  said  to  be  the  means  by  which  God 
saves  the  world ;  faith  in  him  is  declared  to  be  the 
condition  of  having  eternal  life,  and  to  refuse  him  is 
to  expose  one's  self  to  the  divine  judgment.  It  seems 
to  me,  therefore,  that  the  question  of  Christ's  relation 
to  God  as  represented  in  John  cannot  be  pivoted  upon 
the  phrase  the  Son  of  God  by  itself,  but  must  be 
studied  in  the  light  of  the  associations  which  that 
term  carries  with  it. 

The  Jews  understood  Jesus  to  claim  for  himself 
a  unique  sonship  to  God,  and  sought  to  kill  him 
partly  because  he  "  called  God  his  own  Father 
(jrarepa  lSlov),  making  himself  equal  with  God" 
(v.  18).  He  did  not,  indeed,  make  himself  equal 
with  God  in  the  sense  in  which  they  understood 
him  to  do  so,  for  "  he  answered  and  said  to  them. 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  the  Son  can  do  noth- 
ing of  himself,  but  what  he  seeth  the  Father  doing" 
(v.  19)  ;  and  elsewhere  (xiv.  28),  when  speaking  of 
his  return  to  the  Father,  he  says  that  this  return 
will  involve  a  gain  for  his  disciples,  "  because  the 
Father  is  greater "  than  he ;  that  is,  because  in  the 
renewed  fellowship  with  the  Father  who  is  the  source 
of  his  authority  for  his  mission,  he  will  be  able  to 
work  with  even  greater  efficiency  toward  the  ends 
of  his  kingdom.     In   reply  to   the   criticism   of  the 


UNION   OF   THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     111 

Jews  noticed  above,  Jesus  explains  the  nature  and 
conditions  of  his  work.  In  this  explanation  we  find, 
as  we  should  expect,  not  a  definition  of  his  person, 
but  a  defence  of  his  authority.  He  explains  that  he, 
as  the  object  of  the  Father's  special  love,  has  been 
made  the  giver  of  life  (v.  20,  21)  and  the  dispenser 
of  judgment  (22),  and  that  it  is  God's  will  that  "  all 
may  honor  the  Son,  even  as  they  honor  the  Father  " 
(23),  and  then,  from  the  bestowment  of  spiritual  life 
the  thought  shades  over  into  the  idea  that  in  the  Son 
lie  the  power  and  authority  to  quicken  men  at  the 
resurrection :  "  The  hour  cometh,  in  which  all  that 
are  in  the  tombs  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come 
forth"  (28).  Granting  that  the  word  Son  refers  in 
this  whole  passage  only  to  the  ethical  relation  of 
Jesus  to  God,  —  that  is,  to  him  as  the  chosen  object 
of  divine  love  and  the  bearer  of  divine  authority, — 
we  have  still  to  deal  with  the  question  whether  the 
whole  claim  of  Jesus  to  be  the  author  of  salvation 
and  the  judge  of  the  world,  does  not  presuppose  the 
consciousness  of  a  relation  to  God  specifically  dif- 
ferent from  that  which  any  other  human  being 
sustains. 

In  his  teaching  concerning  himself  as  the  bread  of 
life  (vi.  22-65)  it  was  certainly  not  the  purpose  of 
Jesus  to  comment  on  the  nature  of  his  relation  to 
God  except  so  far  as  was  necessary  in  order  to  assert 
his  claim  as  the  bearer  of  salvation.  Yet  in  the 
course  of  this  teaching  he  afhrms  that  he  bestows 
eternal  life,  and  that  faith  in  him  is  the  one  required 


112  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

"work  of  God"  (27-29).  He  claims  to  represent 
on  earth  the  mind  and  will  of  God,  and  to  be  the 
One  who  will  raise  men  from  the  dead  at  the  last 
day  (38,  40).  When  the  Jews  murmur  at  these 
claims,  he  asserts  in  reply  that  he  stands  so  related 
to  God  that  those  who  really  know  God  are  led  by 
this  knowledge  to  receive  him,  and  that  his  is  a 
fellowship  with  God  which  is  absolutely  unique  :  "  Not 
that  any  man  hath  seen  the  Father,  save  he  which  is 
from  God,  he  hath  seen  the  Father "  (vi.  46 ;  ef. 
Matt.  xi.  27  ;  Luke  x.  22).  When  every  fair  conces- 
sion to  those  who  maintain  the  ethical  import  of 
these  passages  is  made,  there  still  remains  the  capital 
fact  that  Jesus  makes  claims  for  himself  which  would 
be  preposterous  in  any  other  ;  that  he  declares  that 
he  comes  forth  from  God  and  represents  God  in  a 
sense  altogether  unique,  and  that  he  is  the  bearer 
in  himself  of  divine  life,  and  the  judge  of  the  world. 
It  becomes  more  and  more  evident  as  the  decisive 
passages  are  passed  in  review  that  the  Johannine 
doctrine  of  Christ's  person  is  dependent  in  but  a  very 
small  degree  on  the  question  whether  the  term  Son 
has  always  an  ethical  sense,  or  sometimes  also  a 
metaphysical  import.  But  this  question,  as  forming 
an  element  in  the  larger  problem,  must  be  further 
considered. 

There  are  several  passages  which  show  that  it  is 
not  the  sending  of  Jesus  Christ  into  the  world  which 
constitutes  him  Son  of  God,  but  that  he  is  the  Son 
who  is  sent  into  the  world,  and  that  his  sonship  to 


UNION   OF   THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     llo 

God  therefore  involves  his  relation  to  the  Father 
previous  to  his  incarnation  ;  for  example  :  "  God  so 
loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son," 
etc.  (iii.  16),  He  is  the  Son  of  God  previous  to  his 
coming  into  the  world,  whatever  that  relation  may 
include.  To  the  same  purport  is  the  next  verse  : 
"  God  sent  not  the  Son  into  the  world  to  judge  the 
world,"  etc.  (iii.  17).  In  some  passages  where  the 
term  Son  is  not  employed,  the  same  idea  is  brought 
out  even  more  explicitly  :  "  And  now,  0  Father, 
glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self  (irapa  aeavrw, 
at  thy  side)  with  the  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  be- 
fore the  world  was  "  (xvii.  5).  "  Verily,  verily,  I  say 
unto  you,  before  Abraham  was  born,  I  am"  (viii.  58). 
While  these  passages  do  not  in  themselves  bear 
directly  upon  the  import  of  the  title  &'o7i  of  Grod, 
they  do  tend,  in  connection  with  passages  which 
speak  of  God's  sending  the  Son,  to  establish  the  con- 
clusion that  the  sonship  of  Christ  to  God  presup- 
poses and  includes  a  pretemporal  and  eternal  relation 
between  him  and  the  Father. 

It  is  doubtless  true  that  the  ethical  aspect  of  Jesus' 
relation  to  God  and  of  the  mission  given  him  by  the 
Father,  is  what  is  most  prominently  brought  forward 
in  the  passages  which  speak  of  his  sonship.  This 
is  what  the  practical  and  historical  character  of  the 
Gospel  should  lead  us  to  expect.  The  Gospel  is  not 
a  treatise  on  the  metaphysical  nature  of  Christ,  but 
an  account  of  the  way  in  which  he  revealed  God. 
His  perfect  liarmony  with  the  Father's  will,  and  his 


114  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

consequent  fitness  to  accomplish  the  work  of  man's 
salvation,  are  naturally  made  especially  prominent. 
He  is  the  bearer  of  divine  life  because  he  stands  in 
immediate  relation  with  the  "  living  Father  "  (vi.  57). 
He  and  the  Father  "  are  one  "  (x.  30)  in  the  work 
of  redemption.  In  this  passage  a  unity  of  will  and 
purpose,  and  not  a  unity  of  essence,  is  primarily  re- 
ferred to,  as  the  context  shows.  The  meaning  is 
that  his  sheep  are  safe  since  the  Father  has  given 
them  to  him,  and  the  Father's  power  is  therefore 
pledged  to  keep  them.  In  this  determination  to 
guard  them  he  and  the  Father  are  one.  It  is  a  "  dy- 
namic fellowship "  (Meyer)  which  is  here  asserted. 
He  and  the  Father  perfectly  co-operate  in  all  that 
concerns  the  salvation  of  his  people.  Not  even 
Calvin  referred  this  passage  to  the  unity  of  essence. 
This  interpretation,  however,  in  no  way  prejudices 
the  question  whether  the  metaphysical  unity  is  pre- 
supposed and  required  by  that  ethical  unity  which  is 
asserted.  It  accords  with  the  whole  purpose  of  the 
Gospel  to  present  Christ  as  doing  nothing  of  himself 
(a(f)  eavTov,  v,  19),  that  is,  in  independence  of  the 
Father's  will  and  purpose.  Hence  Jesus  says :  "  He 
that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father "  (xiv.  9), 
since  he  is  conscious  that  he  perfectly  embodies  and 
reveals  the  Father's  will.  This  he  does  by  virtue  of 
that  perfect  fellowship  which  subsists  between  himself 
and  the  Father  :  "  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father 
in  me "  (xiv.  11).  His  words  and  works  are  the 
proof  of  this  mutual   fellowship,  this  perfect  moral 


UNION   OF   THE   SON  WITH   THE   FATHER     115 

unity.  The  same  reciprocal  fellovyship  in  will  and 
purpose  is  depicted  in  x.  38,  where  Jesus  exhorts 
the  Jews  to  acknowledge  his  works  tliat  they  may 
"  know  and  understand  that  the  Father  is  in  me,  and 
I  in  the  Father."  That  an  ethical  unity  is  referred 
to  in  xvii.  21  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  our  Lord 
prays  that  his  followers  may  be  one  even  as  he  and 
the  Father  are  one.  Since  an  ethical  union  only  can 
exist  among  believers,  it  must  be  the  ethical  aspect 
of  his  own  union  with  the  Fatlier  which  he  presents 
as  the  type  of  Christian  fellowship.  These  passages 
do  not,  however,  militate  against  the  idea  of  a  meta- 
physical unity,  but  leave  the  question  open  whether 
this  perfect  ethical  or  dynamic  fellowship  itself  re- 
quires the  supposition  of  a  unity  of  essence.  Much 
less  can  these  passages  justify  a  negative  answer  to 
the  question  whether,  in  other  terms  and  for  purposes 
different  from  those  which  are  here  in  view,  the 
Apostle  John  teaches  that  the  Son  exists  in  an  eternal, 
essential  unity  with  the  Fatlier. 

The  decision  of  this  latter  question  —  which  must 
go  a  long  way  toward  answering  the  former  — 
hinges  chiefly  on  the  meaning  of  the  passages  which 
assert  or  imply  the  pre-existence  of  Christ.  Wendt 
makes  the  ethical  relations  which  we  have  noticed 
determining  for  the  interpretation  of  these  passages, 
which  have  been  thought  to  assert  more  than  ethical 
union.i  He  finds  in  the  sayings  of  Jesus  that  his 
disciples  were  not  of  the  world  (xv.  19),  and  that  the 

1   Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  151  sq.  (orig.  p.  450  sq.). 


116  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

unbelieving  Jews  were  of  the  devil  (viii.  44),  the  key 
to  Jesus'  meaning  when  he  claims  to  come  forth 
from  God  (xvi.  28).  He  concludes  that  Jesus  comes 
from  God  and  is  sent  bj  the  Father  into  the  world 
only  in  a  "  figurative "  sense.  But  are  these  two 
classes  of  passages  parallel,  or  even  kindred  in 
meaning  and  purpose  ?  Can  we  reason  from  the  sig- 
nificance of  those  passages  which  depict  the  moral 
kinships  of  men,  to  a  figurative  use  of  language  on 
Jesus'  part  concerning  his  own  person  and  the 
grounds  of  his  authority  and  claims  ?  Does  Jesus 
ever  apply  to  any  other  the  "  figurative  "  language 
which  he  applies  to  himself  ?  Does  he  ever  say  of 
any  other  that  he  comes  from  God  and  that  God 
has  sent  him  into  the  world  ?  Wendt  reminds  us 
that  "  believers  are  born  of  God  and  come  from 
God,"^  and  appeals  in  illustration  to  passages  like  I. 
iv.  4 :  "Ye  are  of  God"  (e/c  tov  6eov).  But  it  is  self- 
evident  that  this  expression  is  but  the  counterpart  of 
the  phrase  "  of  the  world  "  (verse  5),  and  is  equivalent 
to  the  phrase  "  begotten  of  God."  The  whole  passage 
shows  that  it  is  an  ethical  kinship  to  God,  on  the  one 
hand,  or  to  the  wicked  world,  on  the  other,  which  is 
meant.  Can  any  one  seriously  consider  these  pas- 
sages as  furnishing  any  parallel  to  those  in  which 
Jesus  asserts  that  he  was  sent  by  the  Father  into 
the  world,  and  that  he  abode  at  the  Father's  side, 
sharing  his  glory  before  the  world  was  (xvii.  5,  22, 
24)  ?     This  procedure  treats  the  whole  self-testimony 

^   Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  161,  note  (orig.  p.  458). 


UNION  OF   THE   SON  WITH   THE   FATHER     117 

of  Jesus  as  "  figurative  "  —  where  the  language  gives 
no  sign  of  being  such  —  on  the  ground  that  the 
figure  of  a  new  birth  is  common  in  John  to  express 
the  idea  of  a  moral  renewal.  The  fact  of  chief  sig- 
nificance remains  that  Jesus  never  applies  to  himself 
this  language  about  being  begotten  from  God  which 
he  applies  to  others,  and  that  he  never  applies  to  any 
other  the  descriptions  which  he  gives  of  his  own  com- 
ing from  God.  The  two  cases  are  so  different  that 
to  make  the  former  determining  for  the  latter  does  not 
result  so  much  in  making  the  terms  of  the  latter  "  fig- 
urative "  as  in  making  them  meaningless  and  untrue. 
On  this  method  of  interpretation  the  statement  "  I 
came  forth  from  God  "  (xvi.  28)  means,  I  was  chosen 
by  God ;  and  the  assertion  "  I  came  down  from 
heaven  "  (iii.  13,  31 ;  vi.  38)  means,  I  am  in  fellowship 
with  God.  It  may  well  be  doubted  whether  these 
texts  can  sustain  to  the  meanings  which  they  are 
thus  made  to  yield  the  relation  of  figure  to  reality. 
But  Wendt's  interpretation  may  be  further  tested 
by  his  handling  of  the  crucial  texts,  xvii.  5  and 
viii.  58.1 

In  his  intercessory  prayer  (xvii.  5)  Jesus  uses  these 
words :  "  And  now,  0  Father,  glorify  thou  me  with 

1  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  168  sq.  (orig.  p.  464  sq.).  The  passage 
vi.  62,  "What  then  if  ye  should  behold  the  Son  of  man  as- 
cending where  he  was  before,"  Wendt  rules  out  of  court,  be- 
cause, in  his  view  that  our  Fourth  Gospel  is  a  redaction  by  a 
later  hand  of  memoranda  preserved  by  John,  he  considers  that 
this  passage  bears  the  marks  of  an  interpolation  by  the  editor. 
Ih.  p.  168,  note. 


118  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

thine  own  self  (jrapa  aeavTw),  with  tlie  glory  which 
I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was."  This  passage 
seems  plainly  to  refer  to  a  mode  of  personal  pre-exis- 
tence  on  the  part  of  Christ  in  heaven  to  which  he 
expects  to  return  ;  and  Wendt  admits  that  to  modern 
ears  the  language  naturally  conveys  this  meaning. 
But  he  affirms  that  "  according  to  the  mode  of  speech 
and  conception  prevalent  in  the  New  Testament,  a 
heavenly  good,  and  so  also  a  heavenly  glory,  can  be 
conceived  and  spoken  of  as  existing  with  God  and 
belonging  to  a  person,  not  because  this  person  already 
exists  and  is  invested  with  glory,  but  because  the 
glory  of  God  is  in  some  way  deposited  and  preserved 
for  this  person  in  heaven."  ^  In  illustration,  reference 
is  made  to  the  treasure  or  reward  which  is  said  to  be 
laid  up  for  the  disciples  in  heaven  (Matt.  vi.  20 ;  v.  12 
et  al.).  Wendt  concludes  that  the  glory  which  Christ 
had  with  the  Father  before  the  world  was,  could  only 
have  been  the  ideal  glory  for  which  the  Father  had 
destined  him  from  eternity ;  and  he  thinks  this  view 
is  confirmed  by  the  way  in  which,  in  his  teaching,  he 
makes  his  prospective  glorification  to  depend  upon 
the  accomplishment  of  his  earthly  ministry. 

We  must  consider  whether  this  alleged  difference 
between  New  Testament  and  modern  modes  of  thought 
in  respect  to  the  subject  under  discussion  is  estab- 
lished by  adequate  evidence.  It  is  to  be  noticed,  first 
of  all,  that  our  passage  does  not  merely  assert  (as 
Wendt's  argument  seems  to  assume)  the  existence  in 

^  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  169  (orig.  p.  465). 


UNION  OF   THE   SON   WITH   THE   FATHER     119 

heaven  of  the  glory  with  which  Christ  was  to  be 
endowed.  The  passage  asserts  the  existence  of  Christ 
himself^  not  that  of  a  glory  destined  for  him,  "  before 
the  world  was."  Wendt  treats  the  passage  as  if  its 
import  were :  Confer  upon  me  now  the  glory  which 
has  been  designed  and  kept  for  me  from  eternity  ; 
whereas  it  really  says :  Bestow  upon  me  the  glory 
whicli  /  possessed  at  thy  side,  in  loving  fellowship 
with  thee,  before  the  world  existed.  The  difference 
between  these  two  propositions  is  one  that  can  be 
resolved  by  no  known  variation  between  New  Testa- 
ment and  modern  modes  of  thought.  The  passages 
cited  by  Wendt  do  not  afford  the  slightest  evidence 
that  the  New  Testament  ever  speaks  elsewhere  of 
the  pre-existence  of  persons,  where  it  means  only  that 
some  endowment  or  gift  is'  prepared  for  them  in  God's 
purpose.  The  expressions  respecting  the  laying  up 
of  the  reward  of  well-doing  (Matt.  v.  12),  and  the 
preparation  of  the  kingdom  (Matt.  xxv.  34),  are  de- 
signed to  emphasize  the  certainty  of  the  blessedness 
to  which  the  terms  refer.  This  result  is  already 
assured  in  God's  fixed  purpose.  But  who  can  imag- 
ine Jesus  bringing  out  this  truth  by  telling  his  dis- 
ciples that  they  themselves  had  existed  in  eternity  in 
the  enjoyment  of  heavenly  blessedness  ?  If  these 
representations  were  so  changed  as  to  be  made  really 
parallel  in  form  and  import  to  John  xvii.  5,  the  mean- 
ing of  Matt.  xxv.  34  would  be :  Come,  ye  blessed  of 
my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  in  which  you  have 
participated  from  the  foundation  of  the  world.     But 


120  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

this  is  a  very  different  statement  from  that  which 
the  passage  actually  contains ;  yet  it  is  no  more 
different  from  it  than  is  the  statement  of  John  xvii.  5 
from  those  of  the  passages  which  Wendt  appeals  to 
in  explanation  of  its  meaning. 

It  is  very  important  in  Biblical  study  to  recognize  all 
actual  differences  between  ancient  and  modern  modes 
of  conception  and  thought.  But  I  am  not  aware 
that  the  representation  of  a  reward  prepared  and 
ready  for  those  to  whom  it  is  to  be  given,  is  a  mode 
of  thought  peculiar  to  antiquity  ;  but,  even  if  it  were, 
I  can  see  no  ground  in  that  fact  for  the  opinion  that 
the  New  Testament  may  even  speak  of  the  persons 
themselves  wdio  are  to  receive  the  destined  rewards  as 
already  pre-existing  in  heaven  in  the  enjoyment  of 
them.  If  so,  it  is  remarkalile  that  Christ  alone  is  so 
spoken  of.  It  is,  moreover,  certain  that  the  passages 
which  Wendt  cites  from  the  Synoptists  furnish  no 
parallel  to  John  xvii.  6.  The  truth  is  that  these  pas- 
sages prove  nothing  in  favor  of  his  view  of  John  xvii.  5, 
and  that  if  they  were  of  such  a  kind  as  to  prove  any- 
thing, they  would  prove  too  much,  since  they  would 
justify  the  representation  of  Christ's  disciples  as  also 
pre-existing. 

The  statement  of  Jesus  in  viii.  58, "  Before  Abraham 
was  (i  e.  was  born,  'yeveaOai),  I  am,"  Wendt  explains 
as  denoting  the  existence  of  Jesus  "  in  the  thoughts, 
purposes,  and  promises  of  God."  ^  He  admits  that 
"  the  discourse  is  fashioned  as  if  it  treated  of  real 

^   Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  176  (orig.  p.  470). 


UNION   OF  THE   SON   WITH   THE  FATHER     121 

existence,"  but  "  we  can  still  perceive  from  the  con- 
nection that  an  ideal  existence  is  intended."  ^  Let  us 
glance  at  the  connection.  The  Jews  reproach  Jesus 
with  claiming  to  be  greater  than  Abraham  (viii.  53). 
Jesus  admits,  and  even  maintains,  the  claim.  Abraham 
longed  to  see  the  day  of  the  Messiah,  "  and  he  saw  it, 
and  was  glad  "  (viii.  56).  Whether  it  was  in  prophetic 
hope  on  earth,  or  in  paradise  centuries  afterwards,  that 
he  saw  Messiah's  work,  the  purport  of  the  statement, 
in  either  case,  is  that  Abraham's  interest  as  a  "  man 
of  religion"  centred  in  the  Messiah  and  presupposed 
the  Messiah's  superiority  to  himself.  The  Jews  again 
object :  If  Abraham  has  seen  you,  you  must  have  seen 
him ;  but  you  are  not  half  a  century  old,  and  he  lived 
centuries  ago.  The  point  of  their  objection  is  that 
centuries  have  intervened  between  Abraham's  lifetime 
and  that  of  Jesus.  To  this  objection  Jesus  replies : 
"  Before  Abraham  was  born,  I  am."  The  purpose  of 
this  affirmation  is  to  offset  the  charge  that  he  could 
never  have  seen  Abraham  l:)ecause  he  was  never  con- 
temporary with  him.  Now,  which  assertion  would  best 
meet  the  point  of  his  opposers,  that  of  an  ideal  exist- 
ence in  God's  purpose,  before  Abraham's  birth,  or  that 
of  a  real  existence  ?  No  doubt  either  statement,  if 
admitted  to  be  true,  would  serve  to  establish  his  general 
superiority  to  Abraham ;  only  the  latter,  however, 
would  meet  the  objection  of  the  Jews  which  called  it 
forth. 

Wendt  maintains  that,  since  Abraham's  seeing  of 

^   Teaching  of  Jexns  ,  ii.  177  (orig.  p.  471). 


122  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Messiah's  day  must  have  been  only  prophetic  and  ideal, 
because  Messiah's  day  was  not  a  reality  in  Abraham's 
time,  the  existence  of  Christ  before  Abraham  must, 
therefore,  have  been  ideal  also.  I  prefer  the  inter- 
pretation according  to  which  Abraham  is  represented 
as  seeing  in  paradise  the  day  of  the  Messiah  in  its 
actual  realization ;  but  even  if  we  adopt  the  view  that 
this  seeing  was  in  prophetic  vision,  the  conclusion 
which  Wendt  draws  would  not  logically  follow.  The 
prophetic  foresight  of  Messiah's  work  is  as  consistent 
with  his  real  pre-existence  as  it  is  with  his  ideal  pre- 
existence.  The  prevision  of  Messiah's  earthly  mission 
in  no  way  prejudices  the  question  as  to  the  nature  of 
his  person.  As  in  dealing  with  xvii.  5,  Wendt  overlooked 
the  difference  between  the  idea  that  Christ's  glory  was 
laid  up  in  God's  purpose  for  him  and  the  actual  asser- 
tion of  the  passage  that  Christ  existed  in  eternity  in 
the  possession  of  heavenly  glory,  so  here  he  lightly 
passes  over  the  objection  of  the  Jews  which  immedi- 
ately called  out  Jesus'  statement,  and  also  leaves 
unnoticed  the  natural  and  very  significant  contrast 
between  Abraham's  birth  and  Christ's  absolute  existence 
("lam"). 

Certain  passages  in  the  First  Epistle  also  should  be 
placed  in  connection  with  those  already  considered. 
In  I.  i.  1  we  are  told  that  the  content  of  the  gospel 
message  was  "  from  the  beginning  "  (o  rjv  air  ap'^r^'i). 
Despite  the  involved  construction  of  the  opening  verses 
of  this  epistle,  the  idea  is  plain.  The  substance  of  the 
message  is  eternal  life.    This  life  is  in  Christ,  and  was 


UNION  OF   THE   SON  WITH   THE   FATHER     123 

brought  to  the  world  by  him.  But  before  its  manifest- 
ation it  was  with  the  Father  (tt/jo?  tov  irarepa,  verse 
2)  by  virtue  of  the  fellowship  of  the  Son  in  whom  it 
abides.  Here  the  heavenly  good  which  the  apostle 
experienced  in  his  fellowship  with  Christ  is  pictured 
as  pre-existing  "from  the  beginning;"  then  it  was 
manifested  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  we  saw  and  heard  it, 
he  says,  and  now  declare  it  unto  you.  If  these  words 
fall  short  of  a  direct  assertion  that  Christ  himself  was 
from  the  beginning,  we  cannot  doubt  that  they  imply 
it  when  later  we  read :  "  Ye  know  him  which  is  from 
the  beginning"  {iyvaoKare  tov  air'  ap'x^fj'?,  ii.  13,  14). 
The  "  word  of  life  "  to  which  the  gospel  message  relates 
(Trepi,  i.  1)  is  the  record  of  the  revelation  of  him 
(Christ)  who  is  from  the  beginning. 

We  thus  find  that  the  ideas  which  are  presented  in 
the  prologue  are  not  without  support  in  the  writings 
of  the  apostle  when  taken  as  a  whole.  It  is  true  that 
the  pre-existence  of  the  Son  and  his  essential  relation 
to  the  Father,  are  incidentally  presented.  It  accords 
with  the  purpose  of  John's  writings  that  these  ideas 
should  stand  in  the  background,  rather  than  in  the 
foreground,  of  his  picture  of  Christ.  They  are  the 
presuppositions  of  his  descriptions  and  arguments, 
rather  than  their  immediate  subject.  But  they  are  not 
on  this  account  less  fundamental  in  his  whole  view  of 
the  person  and  work  of  Christ.  The  prologue  is  seen 
to  present,  in  its  peculiar  terms  and  for  its  peculiar 
purpose,  a  view  of  Christ's  pre-incarnate  nature  and 
relation  to  God  which  the  whole  Gospel  assumes.    The 


124  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

prologue  thus  stands  related  to  the  Gospel  as  the  ves- 
tibule to  the  house;  it  is  a  means  of  entrance,  but  it  is 
also  an  integral  part  of  the  structure. 

Respecting  the  term  Son  of  God,  our  conclusion 
must  be  that  it  is  used  to  denote  a  unique  relation 
of  fellowship  and  unity  on  the  part  of  Jesus  with 
God.  It  is  more  than  a  designation  of  his  Messiah- 
ship.  It  denotes  a  permanent  relation.  Others  he- 
come  sons  of  God  ;  he  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  as  such 
was  sent  into  the  world.  While,  therefore,  the  title 
is  used  chiefly  to  emphasize  the  authority  of  Christ 
as  the  agent  of  the  divine  will,  it  presupposes  an 
essential  relation  of  Jesus  to  God,  since  as  Son  he  is 
sent  into  the  world.  The  unique  ethical  or  dynamic 
/  union  of  Jesus  with  God  stands  in  the  foreground, 
'  but  this  union  requires  and  rests  upon  an  essential 
union  of  nature.  The  phrase  Son  of  God  cannot, 
indeed,  be  said  to  carry  in  itself  directly  the  signifi- 
cance which  it  bears  in  the  Trinitarian  creed,  but  it 
can  be  justly  maintained  that  the  term,  in  connection 
with  the  Logos-doctrine  and  with  the  assertions  of 
Christ's  pre-existence,  inevitably  gives  rise  to  the 
problem  with  which  theology  has  sought  to  deal 
in  its  doctrine  of  the  hypostatic  sonship  of  Christ. 
Although  the  title  Son  is  not  directly  used  by  John 
in  a  metaphysical  sense,  it  is  so  used  as  to  imply  a 
pretemporal  relation  of  Jesus  to  God,  and  stands  so 
related  to  explicit  assertions  of  the  pre-existence  and 
divinity  of  Christ  as  to  justify  the  conclusion  that  it 
is  a  fundamental  assumption  of  John's  theology  that 


UNION    OF    THE    SON    WITH   THE    FATHER     125 

Jesus  Christ,  in  his  pre-incarnate  form  of  being, 
existed  eternally  in  an  essential  unity  of  nature  with 
God. 

This  conclusion  also  determines  our  view  of  the 
import  of  /xovo'yevrj<i.  It  is  not  used  in  the  sense  of 
the  Athanasian  creed,  to  denote  an  eternal  process  of 
generation  as  contrasted  with  an  act  of  creation.  It 
is  employed  to  add  emphasis  to  the  idea  of  Christ's 
unique  relation  to  God  as  the  perfect  object  of  the 
divine  love  and  the  perfect  representative  of  the 
divine  will.  The  import  of  the  term  was  determined 
for  the  apostle,  not  by  metaphysical  speculation,  but 
by  the  analogy  of  human  relations.  The  term  can 
justly  be  appealed  to  as  emphasizing  that  unique 
relation  of  Jesus  to  God  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
presupposes  a  kinship  of  essence,  but  not  as  intended 
or  adapted  itself  to  describe  or  indicate  the  nature  of 
that  relation. 

Criticism  can  only  avoid  the  conclusion  that  Jesus 
possessed  the  consciousness  of  having  personally  ex- 
isted previous  to  his  life  on  earth  in  an  essential 
life-fellowship  with  God,  to  which  he  knew  that  he 
should  return  after  his  work  was  finished,  either  by 
unnatural  interpretations  of  the  passages  which  speak 
of  that  relation,  or  by  discrediting  the  historical  trust- 
worthiness of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Those  who  con- 
sider the  Gospel  to  be  a  product  of  second  century 
speculation  can  consistently  regard  its  Christology  as 
a  post-apostolic  dogmatic  development.  Others  who 
accept  its  direct  apostolic  authorship,  as  Beyschlag, 


126  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

or  who  accept  it  in  a  conditional  form,  as  Wendt,  can 
escape  the  conclusion  that  it  teaches  the  pre-exist- 
ence  and  deity  of  Christ  only  by  resolving  the  Logos 
into  an  abstract  principle,  and  by  treating  the  state- 
ments of  Christ's  consciousness  of  a  pretemporal 
life  as  examples  of  a  Jewish  mode  of  thought  which 
is  not  current  among  moderns. 

The  total  impression  of  John's  conception  of  the 
person  of  his  Master  can  be  gained  only  by  combin- 
ing what  he  says  of  the  Logos,  of  the  Son,  and  of 
his  pre-existence.  When  this  is  done  and  when  the 
various  passages  are  taken  in  their  natural  meaning 
and  force,  the  conclusion  —  so  far  as  the  teaching  of 
the  Johannine  writings  is  concerned  —  can  be  no 
other  than  that  to  which  Cremer  is  led  in  view  of 
the  teaching  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  whole: 
"  It  lies  in  the  idea  of  the  Messianic  sonship  to 
God,  as  this  is  embodied  in  the  person  and  history 
of  Jesus,  that  this  sonship  is  something  superter- 
restrial  and  eternal."  "  The  Messianic  Son  of  God 
is  the  pre-existent  Son  of  God,"  ^ 

^  Bibl.-iheol.  Worterhuch  der  Neutest.  Grdcitdt,  suh  voce,  6  vlbs 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   DOCTRINE   OP   SIN 

literature.  —  Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.,  Of  the  World,  ii. 
415-428  (orig.  pp.  463-478)  ;  Westcott  :  Epistles  of  St.  John^ 
The  Idea  of  Sin  in  St.  John,  pp.  37-40 ;  Messner  :  Lehre  der 
Apostel,'D\e  Slinde,  pp.  328-334;  Frommanx  :  Johann.  Lehrh., 
Verhiiltniss  der  IMenschheit  zu  Gott  und  deiii  Logos,  pp.  242- 
345;  Plummer:  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  The  Three  Evil  Ten- 
dencies in  the  World,  and  Antic?irist,  pp.  154-160;  Wendt: 
Teaching  of  Jesus,  Being  from  God  or  from  the  devil  according 
to  the  Johannine  discourses,  ii.  114-121  (orig.  pp.  420-426) ;  Bey- 
SCHLAG  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Die  AVelt,  SUnde  und  Teufel,  ii.  428- 
432;  Weiss:  Johann.  Lehrh.,  Die  beiden  INIenschenklassen, 
pp.  128-138 ;  Lechler  :  Apostolic  and  Post- Apostolic  Times,  The 
World  and  the  Prince  of  this  World,  ii.  181-188  (orig.  pp.  461- 
465)  ;  Baur  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Der  Gegensatz  des  Lichts  und  der 
Finsterniss,  u.  s.  w.,  pp.  359-362. 

The  idea  of  sin  is  presented  in  the  writings  of  John 
in  a  considerable  variety  of  forms.  The  nearest  ap- 
proach to  a  definition  of  sin  is  found  in  the  First 
Epistle  (iii.  4) :  "  sin  is  lawlessness "  (97  d/xapria 
iarlv  r)  avojxia).  The  apostle  is  showing  the  incon- 
sistency between  sonship  to  God  and  the  Christian's 
hope  of  attaining  likeness  to  Christ,  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  practice  of  sin  QiroLelv  rrjv  dfiapriav^,  on  the 
other.     This  contrariety  is  grounded  in  the  fact  that 


128  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

sin  is  a  violation  of  the  divine  ordfer.  The  precise 
nature  and  scope  of  the  law  to  which  sin  is  contrary 
is  not  defined.  We  are  at  liberty  to  regard  it  as  an 
expression  of  the  divine  will  in  s^eneral,  and  to  consider 
sin,  as  here  described,  as  the  selfish  assertion  of  the 
human  will  against  the  divine.  The  passage  yields 
us  a  generic  idea  only ;  for  more  concrete  descriptions 
of  sin  we  turn  to  other  passages. 

The  apostle's  tendency  to  employ  etliical  contrasts 
naturally  leads  him  to  define  sin  as  "  the  darkness  " 
(?7  (jKOTia^  TO  (TKOTO'i).  lu  tliesc  expressions  the 
article  is  generally  found,  and  designates  the  moral 
condition  which  is  symbolized  by  "  darl<:ness  "  as  char- 
acteristic of  the  sinful  world.  This  contrast  of  light 
and  darkness  meets  us  in  the  prologue.  The  life 
which  emanated  from  the  Logos  "  was  the  light  of 
men"  (i.  4).  This  light  "  shineth  in  the  darkness" 
(i.  5),  a  symbol  for  the  sinful  state  of  the  world  in  its 
selfish  isolation  from  God.  Elsewhere  in  the  Gospel 
the  term  is  chiefly  used  in  the  expression,  "  to  walk 
in  darkness  "  (viii.  12  ;  xii.  35  ;  ef.  I.  i.  6),  or  "  to  abide 
in  darkness  "  (xii.  46),  and  refers  to  the  wicked  moral 
blindness  which  disobedience  to  God  induces.  Sim- 
ilarly in  the  First  Epistle  "  the  darkness  "  — the  sinful 
folly  of  the  pre-Christian  life  —  is  described  as  "pass- 
ing away "  (ii.  8)  from  the  true  Christian  man ; 
where  hatred  is  still  indulged  the  darkness  continues. 
We  may  say,  then,  that  light  is  with  John  the  symbol 
of  goodness,  love,  and  spiritual  life,  and  that  darkness 
is  the  synonym  of  evil,  hate,  and  moral  death. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  129 

The  question  now  arises,  What  is  the  nature  of  the 
dualism  which  the  contrast  implied  in  the  use  of  the 
terms  light  and  darkness  involves  ?  Is  it  physical, 
that  is,  grounded  in  the  nature  of  man  as  consisting 
of  matter  and  spirit;  or  metaphysical, that  is, inherent 
in  the  essence  of  the  universe  ;  or  ethical,  that  is,  the 
result  of  free  volition  ? 

The  contrast  of  flesh  and  spirit  is  most  explicitly 
presented,  in  the  writings  of  John,  in  the  passage, 
"  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh ;  and  that 
wl)ich  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit"  (iii.  6).  This 
statement  occurs  in  our  Lord's  conversation  with 
Nicodemus  respecting  the  new  birth.  It  is  intended 
to  meet  the  difficulty  of  Nicodemus,  who  could  only 
think  of  the  "  birth  from  above  "  after  the  analogy  of 
man's  natural  birth.  Jesus  says  to  him  in  effect : 
"  Man  stands  related  to  two  orders,  the  natural  and 
the  spiritual.  The  first  birth  pertains  to  the  lower 
sphere  of  being,  the  second  to  the  higher."  The  point 
of  importance  for  our  present  purpose  is  that  these 
two  spheres  are  not  related  to  each  other  as  evil 
and  good,  but  only  as  lower  or  natural,  and  higher  or 
spiritual.  They  are  not  here  described  as  essentially 
and  necessarily  opposed  to  one  another.  In  the  con- 
trast is  implied  a  relative  opposition,  however,  in  so 
far  as  the  lower  elements  of  human  nature  which  are 
comprised  in  the  term  flesh  form  the  sphere  in  which 
animal  appetites  and  passions  operate,  while  the  higher 
powers  of  our  being,  denoted  by  spirit^  ally  us  to  God 
and  render  us  susceptible  to  moral  and  spiritual  infiu- 

9 


130  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

ences.  The  same  contrast  is  presented  in  vi.  63  :  "  It 
is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  noth- 
ing :  the  words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  you  are  spirit, 
and  are  life."  The  work  of  Jesus  for  man  is  in  the 
realm  of  the  spirit ;  it  is  concerned  with  his  higher 
nature  which  connects  him  with  God.  No  mere  phys- 
ical knowledge  of  Christ  or  contact  with  him  {cf.  the 
preceding  verses)  can  avail  to  secure  the  new  life 
which  he  would  impart.  Here,  too,  it  is  evident  that 
flesh  and  spirit  are  not  contrasted  as  specifically  evil 
and  good,  but  rather  as  outward  or  non-spiritual,  and 
vital  or  essential. 

One  other  passage  should  be  cited  in  this  connec- 
tion: "For  all  that  is  in  the  world,  the  lust  of  the 
flesh  (J]  iindvixia  rr)'^  aapico'i'),  and  the  lust  of  the 
eyes,  and  the  vainglory  of  life,  is  not  of  the  Father, 
but  is  of  the  world"  (I.  ii.  16).  Here  the  flesh  is 
conceived  of  as  the  seat,  just  as  the  eyes  are  regarded 
as  the  organs,  of  evil  desires.  An  absolute  identifica- 
tion of  evil  desire  with  the  flesh  is  not,  however,  in- 
volved ;  much  less  an  identification  of  sin  in  general 
with  the  flesh.  The  thought  might  be  presented  thus : 
Sensuous  pleasures  belong  to  the  temporary,  passing 
world,  the  /coV/ao?,  and  not  to  God's  unchanging  spirit- 
ual order.  We  conclude  that  these  passages  do  not 
warrant  the  ascription  to  John  of  a  natural  dualism 
inherent  in  the  human  constitution. 

Is,  then,  the  "  dualism "  of  John  metaphysical  ? 
The  question  will  recur  in  connection  with  various 
passages  which  are  to  be  examined  later,  but  should 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  131 

here  be  briefly  considered  with  special  reference  to  the 
meaning  of  the  terms  light  and  darkness.  It  is  to 
be  observed  that  in  the  prologue,  where  the  light  of 
the  Logos  is  set  in  contrast  with  the  world's  dark- 
ness, the  whole  description  has  the  practical  aim  of 
showing  how  the  heavenly  "  light "  came  into  the 
"  darkness  "  and  how  "  the  darkness  apprehended  it 
not."  The  terms  are  obviously  figurative,  since  they 
are  freely  interchanged  with  personal  designations. 
The  statement  "  The  light  shineth  in  the  darkness  ; 
and  the  darkness  apprehended  it  not "  (i.  5)  is  only 
a  figurative  way  of  saying,  "  He  came  unto  his  own, 
and  they  that  were  his  own  received  him  not "  (i.  11). 
The  "  light  "  is  synonymous  with  the  personal  Logos ; 
the  "  darkness  "  is  synonymous  with  the  sinful  world, 
or,  more  specifically,  with  the  people  to  whom  Jesus 
came  in  his  earthly  manifestation.  The  references  to 
the  "  light  "  and  the  "  darkness  "  are  set  in  unmistaka- 
ble connection  with  free,  personal  action.  The  "  dual- 
ism "  which  they  imply  must,  therefore,  be  an  ethical, 
not  an  essential  or  metaphysical  dualism.  This  con- 
clusion is  confirmed  by  the  way  in  which  the  contrast 
is  employed  throughout  the  Gospel.  The  conflict  of 
light  and  darkness  is  the  conflict  of  morally  good 
actions  and  dispositions,  on  the  one  hand,  with  morally 
evil,  on  the  other.  One  representative  passage  will 
make  this  clear :  "  And  this  is  the  judgment,  that  the 
light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  the  dark- 
ness rather  than  the  light ;  for  their  works  were  evil. 
For  every  one  that  doeth    ill  hateth   the  light,  and 


132  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

Cometh  not  to  the  light,  lest  his  works  should  be 
reproved.  But  he  that  doeth  the  truth  cometh  to  the 
light,  that  his  works  may  be  made  manifest,  that  they 
have  been  wrought  in  God  "  (iii.  19-21).  How  obvi- 
ous it  is  that  the  sphere  of  the  conflict  of  light  and 
darkness  is  here  the  sphere  of  free  moral  action 
(c/.  viii.  12;  xii.  35,  36,  46). 

The  passages  from  the  First  Epistle  which  bear 
upon  the  subject  warrant  no  other  view.  The  apos- 
tle's assertion  that  the  substance  of  the  gospel  mes- 
sage is,  "  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at 
all"  (i.  5),  has  the  practical  purpose  of  showing  that 
the  moral  conduct  of  men  proves  whether  they  really 
have  fellowship  with  God  or  not  (i.  6,  7).  "  Dark- 
ness" symbolizes  the  old  sinful  life,  "  light  "  the  new 
spiritual  life  (ii.  8)  ;  "  darkness  "  is  practically  synon- 
ymous with  hate,  "light"  with  love  (ii.  9,  10). 

The  efforts  which  have  been  made,  in  connection 
with  the  modern  denial  of  the  apostolic  authorship 
of  the  writings  under  consideration,  to  show  the  kin- 
ship between  the  ideas  contained  in  them  and  those 
of  Alexandrian  speculation  or  of  Gnostic  dualism,  are 
not  supported  by  the  natural  force  of  the  descriptions 
of  evil  and  goodness  which  we  have  passed  in  review. 
Whether  the  terms  employed  be  derived  or  original 
is  of  small  consequence  ;  their  significance  and  use 
are  distinctly  ethical,  and  in  this  essential  respect  they 
illustrate  a  radical  difference  between  the  conceptions 
of  sin  and  of  the  world  which  pervade  these  writings, 
and  those  which   are   characteristic   either   of   Neo- 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  13S 

Platonic  Philosophy  or  of  Gnosticism.  Our  author 
regards  the  world  of  human  and  divine  action  whose 
forces  and  agencies  he  describes,  as  a  moral  sj^stem, 
a  sphere  of  free  choice  and  of  strict  responsibility. 
From  this  standpoint  we  shall  proceed  to  consider  his 
doctrine  of  "  the  world"  (o  /cocr/^o?). 

John  uses  the  term  world  in  three  shades  of  mean- 
ing.i  It  designates,  in  the  first  instance,  the  created 
universe  in  general  without  regard  to  moral  qualities, 
as  in  the  expressions  "  before  the  world  was  "  (xvii. 
5),  and  "before  the  foundation  of  the  world"  (xvii. 
24).  More  frequently  it  denotes,  or  at  any  rate  promi- 
nently includes,  the  totality  of  rational  and  moral 
beings,  —  the  world  as  the  sphere  of  free  and  intelli- 
gent action.  In  this  sense  it  is  said  that  light  came 
into  the  world  when  Christ  came  (iii.  19).  So  when 
the  coming  of  the  Son  into  the  world  (xi.  27  ;  xvi.  28) 
is  spoken  of,  it  is  his  relation  to  mankind  as  the  sub- 
jects of  salvation  which  is  primarily  meant.  It  is 
now  but  a  short  step  from  this  sense  of  the  word  to 
that  which  prevails  in  the  writings  of  John,  viz.,  the 
sinful  world,  mankind  as  alienated  from  God.  Some 
passages  seem  to  illustrate  a  use  of  tlie  term  which 
stands  midway  between  these  two  shades  of  meaning 
last  mentioned,  as  where  Jesus  speaks  of  coming  into 
the  world  (of  mankind)  in  order  to  "  save  the  world  " 
(xii.  46,  47),  whose  evil  and  lost  condition  is  as- 
sumed.    The  three  meanings  are  not  perfectly  dis- 

1  Cf.  Reuss,  Hist.  Christ.  TheoL,  ii.  415  sq.  (orig.  ii.  463  sq.y 
Beyschlag,  Neutest.  2'heoL,  ii.  428  sq. 


134  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

'  tinct  but  shade  off  into  one  another,  as  may  be  seen 
m  i.  10 :  "  He  (the  Logos)  was  in  the  world  (of 
mankind),  and  the  world  (universe)  was  made  by  him, 
and  the  world  (of  sinful  men)  knew  him  not."  From 
passages  like  this  it  appears  that,  even  where  no  refer- 
ence is,  made  to  moral  qualities,  it  is  assumed  that  the 
world  is  the  sphere  of  evil,  and  that  where  mankind 
in  general  is  referred  to,  the  universality  of  sin  is  pre- 
supposed. We  are  here  concerned  chiefly  with  that 
prevailing  usage  in  John  in  which  "  the  world  "  means 
distinctly  the  sinful  world  in  estrangement  from  God. 
Only  a  few  of  the  most  emphatic  passages  which  be- 
long under  this  head  need  here  be  quoted.  Speaking 
to  the  Pharisees  who  were  plotting  against  him,  Jesus 
said :  "  Ye  are  from  beneath ;  I  am  from  above  :  ye 
are  of  this  world ;  I  am  not  of  this  world  "  (viii.  23). 
He  declares  that  his  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world 
(xviii.  36) ;  that  the  world  hates  his  disciples  (xvii. 
14)  ;  has  -not  known  God  (xvii.  25) ;  cannot,  on  ac- 
count of  its  moral  blindness  and  perverseness,  receive 
the  Spirit  of  truth  (xiv.  17)  and  is  subject  to  Satan 
as  its  prince  (xii.  31 ;  xiv.  30).  To  the  same  effect 
in  the  First  Epistle  the  apostle  exhorts  his  readers  to 
"  love  not  the  world,  neither  the  things  that  are  in 
the  world,"  on  the  ground  that  the  love  of  the  world 
and  the  love  of  God  are  essentially  opposed  (I.  ii.  15, 
16).  Finally,  the  whole  Johannine  doctrine  of  the 
world  may  be  summed  up  in  the  emphatic  assertion, 
"  The  whole  world  lieth  in  the  evil  one  "  {ev  tS  irovqpw) 
(I.  V.  19). 


THE   DOCTRINE  OF   SIN  135 

That  the.  dualism  which  is  involved  in  the  opposition 
between  God  and  the  world  is  not  metaphysical  but 
ethical,  is  made  clear  by  the  terms  of  the  description. 
When  Jesus  says  that  "  for  judgment  "  he  "  came  into 
this  world,  that  they  which  see  not  may  see  ;  and  that 
they  which  see  may  become  blind  "  (ix.  39),  he  clearly 
means  that  his  work  must,  by  reason  of  its  very  nature, 
occasion  a  still  greater  obduracy  in  those  who  wickedly 
oppose  him,  through  their  continued  rejection  of  his 
truth.  The  world,  so  far  as  his  Pharisaic  opponents 
represent  it,  is  wicked  by  its  own  fault,  and  becomes 
more  so  through  tlie  inevitable  recoil  upon  it  in  judg- 
ment of  its  own  action  in  refusing  the  light.  In  iii. 
19  the  concrete  synonym  for  the  abstract  "  world  " 
is  "  men,"  and  the  ground  of  the  world's  condemna- 
'tion  is  affirmed  to  be  that  the  men  who  compose  it 
"loved  the  darkness  rather  than  the  light;  for  their 
works  were  evil."  The  world  is  opposed  to  God  be- 
cause it  is  wilfully  wicked,  is  animated  by  hate  to 
those  who  follow  Christ  (xv.  18,  19),  and  in  relation 
to  Christ  personally  is  convicted  "  in  respect  of  sin, 
because  they  [who  compose  it]  believe  not "  on  him 
(xvi.  8,  9). 

In  one  striking  passage  (viii.  33-36)  sin  is  described 
as  a  state  of  bondage.  Jesus  had  said  to  certain  Jew- 
ish believers  that  his  truth  should  make  them  free 
(viii.  32).  Not  perceiving  the  profound  spiritual  sig- 
nificance of  his  words,  they  replied  that  as  children  of 
Abraham  they-  had  never  yet  been  in  bondage,  —  im- 
plying,  apparently,   that   the    captivities    which    the 


136  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

nation  had  experienced  had  not  touched  its  essential 
life  or  annulled  its  inalienable  prerogatives.  Jesus 
does  not  drop  his  thought  to  the  level  of  theirs,  but 
proceeds :  "  Every  one  that  committeth  sin  [o  iroiSiv 
Trjv  d/xapriav — lives  an  habitual  life  of  sin]  is  the 
bondservant  (80DX.0?)  of  sin  "  (verse  34)  :  If  you  con- 
tinue the  sinful  life  you  will  forfeit  your  place  in 
God's  house  over  which  I  have  authority ;  you  will 
lose  your  citizenship  and  rights  in  the  spiritual  order 
to  which  I  belong ;  therefore  I  say  again  that  the  real 
freedom  is  that  which  the  truth,  as  embodied  and 
represented  by  me,  bestows.  True  freedom  is  found 
only  in  obedience  to  God ;  sin  is  in  its  very  nature 
slavery,  because  it  involves  the  loss  of  God-given 
spiritual  rights,  the  forfeiture  of  man's  divinely  in- 
tended destiny. 

The  words  sin  {a^iapria)  and  to  sin  (dfiapTaveLv) 
occur  frequently  in  our  sources.  Sin  is  commonly 
employed  in  an  abstract  sense  to  denote  a  power  or 
principle,  as  in  the  phrases,  "  the  sin  of  the  world " 
(i.  29),  "to  commit  sin"  (viii.  34),  "your  sin" - 
(viii.  21),  etc.  The  word  is  also  used  to  designate  an 
act  of  sin  as  in  the  phrase,  "a  sin  unto  death" 
(I.  V.  16,  17),  but  this  meaning  is  chiefly  found  where 
the  plural  (aixapriai)  is  used  {e.  g.j  viii.  24 ;  xx.  23 ; 
I.  i.  9).  The  verb  is  also  employed  in  a  two-fold 
sense  corresponding  to  that  above  noticed.  It  may 
have  the  force  of  the  phrase  iroielv  ttjv  d/xapriav  (viii. 
34 ;  I.  iii.  4,  8,  9),  to  sin  habitually,  .to  live  a  sinfuL 
life,  as  in  the  following  passages :  "  Whosoever  abideth 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   STN  137 

in  him  sinneth  not :  whosoever  sinneth  hath  not 
seen  him,  neither  knoweth  him  "  (I.  iii.  6)  ;  "  Whoso- 
ever is  begotten  of  God  doeth  no  sin  {d/jLapTiav  ov 
TTOcel),  because  his  seed  abideth  in  him :  and  he  can- 
not sin,  because  he  is  begotten  of  God  '"  (I.  iii.  9).  In 
other  connections  afMaprdveiv  means  to  do  an  act  of 
sin,  as  where  the  disciples  ask  Jesus  concerning  the 
man  who  was  blind  from  his  birth,  "  Wlio  did  sin,  this 
man,  or  his  parents,  that  he  should  be  born  blind  ?" 
(ix.  2,  3),  and  in  I.  i.  10  {cf.  verse  8)  :  "  If  we  say 
that  we  have  not  sinned,  we  make  him  a  liar  and  his 
word  is  not  in  us." 

The  importance  of  bearing  in  mind  the  distinction 
which  we  have  just  been  tracing  is  especially  seen  in 
the  apparent  contradiction  among  certain  passages  in 
the  First  Epistle  to  which  we  have  already  had  occa- 
sion, in  other  connections,  to  refer.  ,  It  is  affirmed,  on 
the  one  hand,  that  no  Christian  can  truly  say  that  he 
has  not  sinned,  and  the  apostle  exhorts  his  readers  to 
confess  their  sins  (I.  i.  9,  10) ;  and  yet  we  are  told 
in  the  same  Epistle  that  the  Christian  "  sinneth 
not "  and  "  cannot  sin "  (I.  iii.  6,  9).  The  verbal 
contradiction  is  removed  by  attention  to  the  two 
distinct  meanings  of  the  verb  fo  siyi.  All  Christians 
commit  sinful  acts,  but  they  do  not  possess  a  sinful 
character.  The  Christian  life  and  habitual  sinfulness 
are  absolute  contraries ;  in  this  sense  the  Christian 
does  not  commit  sin,  and,  indeed,  cannot  do  so,  since 
if  he  did  he  would  not  be  a  Christian  at  all.  But 
just  as  little  can  he  claim  exemption  from  sinful  im- 


138  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

pulses  and  acts.  Just  as  the  main  direction  of  the 
river,  notwithstanding  its  eddies  and  backcurrents,  is 
ever  toward  the  sea,  so  the  central  current  of  the 
Christian's  life  is  set  toward  God,  despite  the  hinder- 
ing powers  of  evil  which  still  check  its  progress  and 
mar  its  perfection. 

The  way  in  which  John  speaks  of  sin  as  a  power  or 
principle  clearly  implies  that  he  regards  all  men  as 
naturally  sinful  and  in  need  of  redemption.  It  is 
"  the  sin  of  the  world  "  (i.  29)  which  Christ  comes  to 
take  away.  One  of  the  functions  of  the  Spirit  is  to 
"  convict  the  world  in  respect  of  sin  "  (xvi.  8,  9),  that 
is,  to  make  the  world  conscious  of  its  sinfulness  as 
evidenced  by  its  unwillingness  to  receive  Christ. 
Christians  who  have  passed  "  into  life  "  are  conscious 
that  they  were  naturally  in  a  state  of  death  (I.  iii.  14). 
The  love  of  God  which  was  manifested  toward  the 
world  in  the  sending  of  the  Son  aimed  to  secure  the 
result  that,  through  faith  in  him,  men  should  not 
perish  (iii.  16),  as,  apart  from  this  work  of  love,  they 
were  in  peril  of  doing.  Hence  the  frequent  emphasis 
upon  the  saving  work  of  Christ  (iv.  22,  42 ;  v.  34  ; 
xii.  47;  I.  iv.  14).  The  world,  apart  from  redemp- 
tion, is  a  realm  of  moral  darkness  and  death  (i.  5  ;  iii. 
19 ;  xii.  46  ;  I.  ii,  8  ;  iii.  14),  and  is  exposed,  by  reason 
of  its  sinfulness,  to  God's  holy  displeasure  (iii.  16) ; 
in  short,  "  the  whole  world  lieth  in  the  evil  one " 
(I.  V.  19). 

Another  set  of  expressions  connects  sin  with 
demoniacal  agencies.     When  the  Jews  charged  Jesus 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  SIN  139 

with  falsehood  and  blasphemous  pretension  they  em- 
bodied their  accusation  in  tlie  statement :  "  Thou 
hast  a  demon "  (Satfioviov)  (vii.  20 ;  viii.  48,  52 ;  x. 
20).  In  the  Synoptic  Gospels  demoniacal  "  posses- 
sion "  is  commonly  associatecl,  with  some  physical  and 
mental  malady,  especially  with  the  more  violent  forms 
of  mania.  In  the  Fourth  Gospel  "possession"  by 
evil  spirits  is  referred  to  only  in  connection  with  the 
charges  which  the  multitude  made  against  Jesus,  and 
seems  to  have  been  conceived  of  as  a  species  of  mad- 
ness (vii.  20 ;  x.  20) ;  in  viii.  48,  the  accusation 
"  Thou  hast  a  demon "  is  coupled  with  the  charge, 
"  Thou  art  a  Samaritan,"  and  appears  to  involve 
special  bitterness  of  feeling  against  Jesus  on  the  part 
of  his  accusers,  and  may  imply  the  charge  of  wicked- 
ness as  well  as  of  madness.  With  this  passage  may  be 
compared  the  Lord's  reference  to  the  character  of  his 
betrayer,  Judas,  in  the  words  :  "  Did  not  I  choose  you 
the  twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil  ?  "  (Sm'/SoXo?,  vi.  70) 
—  a  strong  expression  to  denote  the  source  and  base 
wickedness  of  his  antagonism  to  his  Master. 

These  passages  lead  us  on  to  other  representations 
in  which  human  sinfulness  is  directly  ascribed  to  the 
agency  of  the  devil  (6  Sid/SoXo^)  or  Satan.  The  devil 
is  said  to  have  put  the  suggestion  or  impulse  to  betray 
Jesus  into  the  heart  of  Judas  (xiii.  2).  The  Jews 
who  opposed  and  accused  Jesus  claimed  God  as  their 
father.  Jesus  denies  that  they  are  true  children  of 
God,  and  says  to  them  :  "■  Ye  are  of  your  father  the 
devil,  and  the  lusts  of  your  father  it  is  your  will  to 


140  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

do "  (viii,  44).  It  is,  of  course,  a  moral  kinship 
which  is  here  under  consideration.  They  are  neither 
sons  of  Abraham  nor  sons  of  God,  since  they  are  not 
akin  to  either  in  the  spirit  of  their  action ;  on  the 
contrary,  they  are,  by. reason  of  their  falseness  and 
murderous  hate,  akin  to  the  devil.  This  idea  of  the 
sonship  of  wicked  men  to  the  devil  —  which  is  pre- 
sented only  in  this  one  passage  in  the  Gospel  —  ap- 
pears also  in  the  First  Epistle :  "  He  that  doeth  sin 
(6  TTOioiv  T7]v  dfxapTLav)  is  of  the  devil  (e/c  tov  Sta^oXov)  ; 
...  In  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifest,  and 
the  children  of  the  devil "  (to,  reicva  rov  Bia/36\ov) 
(I.  iii.  8,  10).  As  those  who  are  of  faith  are  the  sons 
of  Abraham  {cf.  Gal.  iii.  9,  29),  and  those  who  do 
God's  will  are  sons  of  God,  so  those  who  habitually 
work  iniquity  are  morally  kindred  to  the  devil  in  so 
far  as  they  imitate  his  wickedness  and  embody  his 
spirit. 

Here  arises  the  difficult  inquiry.  What  concep- 
tion of  the  origin  and  nature  of  Satan  underlies  the 
references  to  his  agency  in  John's  writings  ?  Two 
passages,  especially,  give  rise  to  this  question :  "  He 
(the  devil)  was  a  murderer  from  the  beginning  (avr' 
a/3;)^r7<?),  ^^^d  stood  not  in  the  truth  (^iv  rfi  aXrjOeia  ovk 
€<TT7}Kev')  ,^  because  there  is  no  truth  in  him.     When 

^  Some  editors  punctuate  this  word  ea-TrjKfv  (so  Tischendorf, 
Meyer,  Weiss).  The  former  reading  (imperfect  of  (ttt]K(iv) 
would  mean  stood  firm  or  steadfast;  the  latter  (perfect  of  larr^^i 
with  force  of  present)  would  express  the  permanent  character- 
istic of  the  subject,  and  would  mean  that  truth  is  an  element 
foreign  to  his  life. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OP  SIN  141 

he  speaketh  a  lie,  he  speaketh  of  his  own :  for  he 
is  a  liar,  and  the  father  thereof "  (6  Trarrjp  avrov) 
(viii.  44)  ;  "  He  that  doeth  sin  is  from  the  devil ;  for 
the  devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning"  (octt'  a/3%^9) 
(I.  iii.  8).  We  must  first  consider  the  force  of  the 
phrase  air  ap^rj'i.  In  the  first  passage  the  interpre- 
tation of  a7r'  apxri<i  will  be  influenced  by  the  view 
which  is  taken  of  the  reference  in  the  word  "  mur- 
derer." Many  exegetes  hold  that  when  the  devil  is 
said  to  have  been  a  murderer  the  allusion  is  to  his 
agency  in  inciting  Cain  to  slay  his  brother.^  This 
explanation  would  detei'mine  the  meaning  of  the 
passage  to  be :  He  was  a  murderer  from  the  time 
when  the  race  was  in  its  infancy.  Since,  however, 
the  act  of  Cain  is  not,  in  the  Old  Testament  (Gen. 
iv.  3  sq.^,  referred  to  the  instigation  of  Satan,  it  is 
more  probable  that  the  passage  alludes  to  the  tempta- 
tion whereby  Satan,  represented  under  the  figure  of  a 
serpent  (Gen.  iii.  1  sq.;  ef.  Rev.  xx.  2),  occasioned  the 
fall  of  man.  In  this  view  the  phrase  utt'  ap^rj'^  would 
most  naturally  mean :  from  the  beginning  of  the 
human  race.^  This  interpretation  seems  to  accord 
best  with  the  natural  force  of  our  second  passage 
(I,  iii.  8),  the  purport  of  which  is  that  there  has 
never  been  a  time  in  the  history  of  the  race  when 
men  have  not  been  subject  to  thp  assaults  of  Satan. 
The  connection  shows  that  the  sphere  of  human  sin 
and  salvation  is  that  in  which  the  sinning  of  Satan  is 

1  So  Nitzsch,  Liicke,  De  Wette,  Reuss. 
«  So  Godet,  Meyer,  Miiller,  Weiss. 


142  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

conceived  of  as  taking  place.  Other  interpretations 
seem  less  plausible.  Especially  objectionable  is  the 
view  that  air'  dpxv'^  is  to  be  taken  absolutely,  which 
would  imply  either  that  God  has  created  an  evil  be- 
ing, or  that  Satan  was  eternal.^  Many  have  taken 
the  phrase  as  meaning :  from  the  devil's  own  begin- 
ning as  such  ;  that  is,  since  by  a  fall  from  a  previous 
state  of  holiness  he  became  Satan.^  This  explana- 
tion, however,  is  unnatural  in  view  of  the  reference  in 
the  word  "  murderer  "  and  in  view  of  the  context  of 
the  passage  from  the  Epistle.  These  considerations 
render  it  very  improbable  that  in  using  the  phrase 
aTT  apx'i'i  the  apostle's  thoughts  went  back  to  any 
time  or  event  anterior  to  the  beginning  of  human 
history  and  experience. 

It  may  be  well  to  point  out,  in  this  connection,  how 
slight  is  the  support  in  the  New  Testament  for  the 
idea  of  a  fall  of  Satan,  There  are  but  two  passages 
(2  Pet.  ii.  4 ;  Jude  6)  which  can,  with  any  degree  of 
probability,  be  construed  as  alluding  to  it ;  and  since 
between  2  Peter  and  Jude  there  is  certainly  some 
kind  of  literary  dependence,  these  two  really  count  as 
one.  The  passages  read :  "  For  if  God  spared  not 
angels  when  they  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell 
[Tartarus],  and  committed  them  to  pits  of  darkness, 
to  be  reserved  unto  judgment,"  etc.  (2  Pet.  ii.  4)  ; 
"  And  angels  which  kept  not  their  own  principality, 

1  So  Hilgenfeld,  Frommann,  Reuss. 

2  So  Augustine,  Martensen,  Delitzsch,  and  most  Roman 
Catholic  theologians. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  143 

but  left  their  proper  habitation,  he  hath  kept  in  ever- 
lasting bonds  under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of 
the  great  day  "  (Jude  6).  No  mention  is  here  made 
of  Satan.  The  passage  in  Jude  (which  is  probably 
the  original)  so  closely  resembles  certain  passages  in 
the  Book  of  Enoch  ^  which  is  explicitly  referred  to 
and  quoted  a  little  further  on  (Jude  14  sq.^  that  little 
room  is  left  for  doubt  that  we  have  here  an  allusion 
to  the  popular  Jewish  doctrine  of  the  fall  of  a  heavenly 
host  from  their  prior  dominion  (apxi)  to  a  state  of 
bondage  and  punishment.  If  it  is  said  that  Satan 
must  be  regarded  as  included  in  this  host,  it  is  still  to 
be  remembered  that  the  deutero-canonical  character 
of  the  books  in  which  these  references  occur,  together 
with  the  certain  dependence  of  these  descriptions 
upon  apocryphal  sources  sucli  as  the  Book  of  Enoch, 
makes  the  derivation  of  a  doctrine  from  the  passages 
quite  precarious.  It  is  probable  that  the  description 
in  Gen.  vi.  2  of  the  "sons  of  God"  (angels)  taking 
as  wives  the  "  daughters  of  men  "  lies  at  the  root  of 
the  popular  tradition  which  is  found  in  the  Book  of 
Enoch.     When  the  sources  and  affinities  of  the  pas- 

1  "  Announce  to  the  watchers  of  the  heaven,  who  have  aban- 
doned the  high  heaven  and  the  holy,  eternal  place,  and  have 
defiled  themselves  with  women,"  etc.  (xii.  4)  ;  "Wherefore  have 
ye  left  the  high,  holy,  eternal  heaven?"  etc.  (xv.  3);  "I  heard 
the  voice  of  the  angel  saying :  '  These  are  the  angels  who 
descended  to  the  earth,  and  revealed  what  was  hidden  to  the 
children  of  men,  and  seduced  the  children  of  men  into  com- 
mitting sin  ' "  (Ixiv.  2).  From  the  translation  by  R.  H.  Charles, 
Oxford,  1893. 


144  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

sages  in  question  are  considered,  it  is  quite  evident 
that  thej  can  have  no  direct  reference  to  the  fall  of 
Satan.  Other  passages  which  are  often  quoted  in 
connection  with  the  subject  in  question  are  quite 
inapplicable,  as,  for  example,  1  Tim.  iii.  6 :  "  Lest 
being  puffed  up  he  fall  into  the  condemnation  [Kpifia, 
judgment]  of  the  devil."  It  is  certainly  difficult  to 
determine  the  exact  sense  of  this  passage,  but  in  any 
case  no  reference  to  the  fall  of  Satan  can  be  found  in 
it.  Still  less  can  such  a  reference  be  found  in  Luke  x. 
18  :  "I  beheld  Satan  falling  as  lightning  from  heaven." 
It  is  necessary  for  our  purpose  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  rational  grounds  of  the  doctrine  of  the  fall 
of  Satan  and  the  supposed  Scriptural  grounds.  On  no 
other  supposition  can  the  Biblical  references  to  Satan 
be  so  naturally  explained.  It  enables  us  to  avoid  the 
Idea  of  an  eternal  dualism  of  good  and  evil,  and  the 
equally  intolerable  conception  that  God  could  create 
a  being  essentially  evil.  In  no  other  way  can  these 
conclusions  be  escaped  on  the  supposition  of  Satan's 
personal  existence.  If  no  one  of  the  theories  just 
alluded  to  be  adopted,  no  course  is  left  but  to  deny, 
as  Frommann  does,  the  personality  of  Satan,  and  to 
understand  the  Scriptural  representations  as  popular 
descriptions  of  the  operation  of  sinful  principles  or 
tendencies  in  the  world.  Frommann  seeks  to  reduce 
the  idea  of  Satan  in  John  to  that  of  an  "  evil  world- 
principle,"  a  "  carnal  tendency,"  the  sum  of  the  "  tem- 
poral and  perishable  in  contrast  to  God."  ^     This  view, 

1  Der  Joliann.Lehrhegriff,  pp.  336,  367. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  145 

taken  in  connection  witli  the  autlior's  interpretation  of 
ctTr'  apxn'i  in  the  absolute  sense,  approximates  the 
Gnostic  conception  of  the  essential  evil  of  matter  and 
of  an  original  dualism  in  the  universe.  One  must  go 
behind  the  text,  and  behind  any  results  which  legiti- 
mate exegesis  can  yield,  if  he  will  make  the  name 
Satan  a  symbol  of  the  "  sensuous  principle "  or  an 
"  evil  tendency."  In  liis  whole  discussion  of  this 
subject  Froramann  is  really  dealing  with  the  thought 
of  Paul  more  than  with  that  of  John,  and  proceeds, 
moreover,  upon  important  misapprehensions  of  the 
teaching  of  the  former. 

So  far  as  the  Johannine  writings  bear  upon  the  idea 
of  the  nature  and  origin  of  the  devil  we  may  sum  the 
matter  up  by  saying  that  all  the  passages  assume  the 
personality  of  Satan,  but  do  not  state  or  imply  any- 
thing as  to  his  origin.  Speculation  on  this  point, 
however,  seems  to  be  shut  up  to  a  single  path.  It 
can  rest  in  no  idea  except  that  of  a  fail  without  giving 
place  to  conceptions  which  are  inconsistent  with  the 
absoluteness,  or  subversive  of  the  goodness  of  God. 

Two  ideas  in  John  —  scarcely  less  difficult  than 
that  which  we  have  just  been  considering  —  remain  to 
be  examined,  that  of  "  antichrist "  (I.  ii.  18,  22  ;  iv. 
3  ;  II.  7),  and  that  of  "  sin  unto  death"  (I.  v.  16,  17). 
A  clue,  however,  is  afforded  us  for  the  understanding 
of  the  former  term  in  the  connection.  In  I.  ii.  22,  we 
are  told  tliat  the  antichrist  is  "  he  that  denieth  the 
Father  and  the  Son ; "  in  I.  iv.  3  that  "  every  spirit 
that  confesseth  not  Jesus"  is  "the  spirit  of  the  anti- 

10 


146  THE  JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Christ,"  and  in  II.  7  that  he  who  confesses  not  Jesus 
Christ  as  coming  in  the  flesh  ^  is  "  the  deceiver  and 
the  antichrist."  The  distinguishing  pecuHarity  of  the 
sin  which  the  term  "antichrist"  comprehends  is  the 
denial  of  the  incarnation  or  messiahship  of  Jesus. 
This  is  a  feature  of  the  Gnostical  tendency  to  which 
the  Epistles  so  often  refer.  According  to  this  doc- 
trine the  world  is  essentially  evil,  and  nothing  divine 
can  abide  in  contact  with  it.  The  heavenly  Christ 
could  not  really  inhabit  a  material  body,  hence  the 
denial  of  the  incarnation ;  just  as  little  could  he  sub- 
mit to  suffering,  hence  the  denial  that  he  came  both 
"  by  water  and  blood  "  (I.  v.  6).  Against  this  denial 
John  asserts  that  Christ  was  not  only  incarnate  at  his 
baptism  ("  came  by  water,"  8t'  vSaro^)  but  at  his  cruci- 
fixion ("  came  by  blood,"  St  ai/jLaTo<i).  The  antichrist- 
ian  spirit  consists,  then,  in  the  denial  of  the  Son's 
incarnation  and  passion  which  springs  from  a  false 
notion  of  the  divine  transcendence,  and  from  a  corre- 
sponding error  concerning  the  world  and  human 
nature  in  their  relation  to  God. 

The  question  remains,  however,  whether  in  speak- 
ing of  antichrist  John  had  in  mind  a  person,  or  a 
tendency,  or  both.  The  prevailing  view  in  the  Church 
has  been  that  "  antichrist "  designates  a  person.  This 
view  rests,  however,  upon  the  supposition  of  a  close 
correspondence,  or  even  identity,  of  the  antichrist  of 

1  The  Greek  is  'irja-ovv  Xpiarbv  ipxojxevov  eu  crapKi.  Neither  of 
our  English  versions  seems  quite  to  reproduce  the  idea  of  the 
text. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  147 

John's  Epistles,  the  "  man  of  sin "  in  the  Pauline 
Apocalypse  (2  Thess.  ii.  3)  and  "the  beast"  in  the 
Book  of  Revelation  (Rev.  xiii.  1  sq.}.  But  this  sup- 
position is  unwarranted.  "  The  beast  "  of  the  Johan- 
nine  Apocalypse  is  a  symbol  for  the  Roman  Empire 
or  for  the  Emperor  Nero  personally.  The  "  man  of 
sin  "  in  2  Thessalonians  is  a  term  for  a  false  Mes- 
siah who  was  to  arise  with  blasphemous  pretensions, 
and  who  should  represent  forces  of  evil  in  the  Jewish 
world  which  the  Roman  power  ("  that  which  restrain- 
eth,"  "the  restrainer"  ii.  6,  7)  should  hold  in  check 
for  a  time  ;  then,  when  the  pressure  of  restraint  was 
taken  away,  the  "  mystery  of  iniquity  "  (Jewish  hos- 
tility to  the  Messiah)  which  was  working  in  secret 
should  break  forth  into  manifestation,  and  Christ  should 
come  and  bring  it  to  naught.  The  terms  "  beast,"  in 
Revelation,  "  man  of  sin"  in  Paul,  and  "antichrist" 
in  John  have  widely  different  associations,  and  refer 
to  manifestations  of  hostility  to  the  gospel  in  widely 
different  fields.  "  The  beast "  symbolizes  Roman 
persecution  ;  "  the  man  of  sin,"  fanatical  Jewish  oppo- 
sition and  pretence  ;  "  antichrist,"  a  Gnostical  subver- 
sion of  the  gospel.  If  the  terms  "  beast  "  and  "  man 
of  sin  "  are  meant  to  indicate  that  the  evil  tendencies 
under  consideration  are  embodied  in  a  person,  as  is 
probably  the  case,  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that 
the  term  "  antichrist "  is  also  a  personal  designation. 
The  question  can  only  be  decided,  if  at  all,  by  the 
passages  in  which  the  term  appears. 

The  first  of  the  four  passages  in  which  anticlirist  is 


148  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

mentioned  (I.  ii.  18)  seems  to  favor  the  view  that  the 
term  designates  a  person.  Prophecy  concerning  his 
appearing  is  alluded  to,  and  the  mention  of  "  many 
antichrists,"  which  appear  to  be  distinguished  from 
antichrist  himself,  seems  to  imply  that  many  persons 
have  arisen  who  embody  the  antichristian  spirit,  but 
that  this  spirit  is  to  have  its  full  and  final  incarnation 
in  a  person  yet  to  appear.  In  the  three  other  passages, 
however,  the  word  is  used  in  nearly  the  same  sense  as 
in  the  phrase  "  many  antichrists  "  already  noted,  to 
mean  persons  who  deny  the  true  messiahship  and 
incarnation  of  Jesus.  The  "whosoever"  of  ii.  23, 
shows  that  the  name  is  applied  to  any  person  who 
makes  the  denial  referred  to.  Still  less  in  iv.  3  does 
"  antichrist "  appear  to  be  a  name  for  some  one  par- 
ticular person.  There  prophecy  concerning  the  coming 
of  "  the  spirit  of  the  antichrist  "  is  alluded  to,  and  this 
spirit  is  said  to  be  in  the  world  already.  This  verse 
seems  to  be  the  equivalent  of  ii.  18,  and  here  it  is 
quite  certain  that  "the  antichrist"  is  conceived  of  as 
a  principle  or  spirit  of  denial,  rather  than  as  an  indi- 
vidual. Finally,  in  II.  7,  "the  antichrist"  is  "the 
deceiver"  who  confesses  not  Jesus  as  coming  in  the 
flesh.  We  see,  then,  that  in  John's  usage  6  at'Tt;^/3to-To? 
is  a  title  which  he  applies  to  many  persons  who  have 
ali-eady  appeared,  —  applies,  in  fact,  to  any  one  who 
denies  the  real  coming  of  the  Son  of  God  into  humanity. 
We  further  observe  that  the  antichrist  that  is  to  come 
is  synonymous  with  the  spirit  of  the  antichrist  which 
is  to  come,  but  which  is  also  already  here.     It  appears 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  149 

to  me,  therefore,  that  the  term  is  used  to  designate 
either  a  tendency,  principle,  or  spirit,  or  to  describe 
the  men  who  embody  that  temper  of  denial  which  the 
apostle  describes  in  the  connection.  If  we  reason 
from  analogy  it  is  certainly  natural,  in  view  of  the 
references  which  are  found  in  both  canonical  and  non- 
canonical  literature  to  persons  who  should  embody 
special  forms  of  wickedness,  to  think  that  John  may 
have  expected  that  some  man  was  to  appear  who 
would  be  "  the  antichrist "  by  eminence.  His  refer- 
ences to  the  subject,  however,  do  not  warrant  this 
conclusion,  although  they  do  not  exclude  it.  It  is 
better  to  abide  by  the  actual  indications  of  his  lan- 
guage than  to  adopt  the  more  uncertain  course  of 
reading  him  in  the  light  of  representations  which,  at 
most,  are  only  analogous  to  his  own.  The  discussion 
of  the  term  "  antichrist "  in  our  sources  has  been  too 
much  complicated  with  the  consideration  of  the  terms 
of  Paul  and  of  the  Apocalypse.  The  subject  has  been 
commonly  treated  as  a  general  doctriual  topic,  instead 
of  a  question  of  exegesis.  Two  of  the  most  competent 
recent  interpreters,^  regarding  solely  the  natural  force 
of  the  passages  where  the  term  occurs  in  the  First 
Epistle,  pronounce  in  favor  of  the  interpretation  for 
which  we  have  expressed  a  preference. 

One  further  theme  remains  to  be  discussed,  —  sin 
unto  death.  The  one  passage  which  brings  this  topic 
before  us  is  I.  v.  16,  17  :  "  If  any  man  see  his  brother 

^  Holtzmann,  Hand-Commentar,  in  loco,  and  Westcott,  The 
Epistles  of  St.  John,  in  loco. 


150  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

sinning  a  sin  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask,  and  God 
will  give  him  life  for  them  that  sin  not  unto  death. 
There  is  a  sin  unto  death  QajxaprCa  7rpo<;  Odvarov)  :  not 
concerning  this  do  I  say  that  he  should  make  request. 
All  unrighteousness  is  sin :  and  there  is  a  sin  not  unto 
death."  It  is  obvious  that  the  writer  means  here  to 
distinguish  differing  degrees  of  wickedness  in  sin. 
But  this  is  almost  the  only  assertion  which  can  be 
made  with  certainty  respecting  the  passage.  Passing 
by  minor  points  which  do  not  essentially  affect  the 
meaning  of  the  phrase  d/xapria  irpo'i  ddvarov,  we  need, 
if  possible,  to  answer  two  questions  :  (1)  Is  a  particu- 
lar act  of  sin,  or  a  certain  kind  of  sin,  here  referred  to  ? 
—  that  is,  is  afxaprCa  best  rendered  as  in  our  English 
versions,  "  a  sin,"  or  as  in  the  margin  of  the  R.  V. 
"  sin  "  ?  (2)  In  either  case,  what  is  the  force  of  tt/jo? 
Bdvarov'i  What  distinguishes  this  sin,  or  this  kind 
of  sin,  from  all  others  ? 

Respecting  the  first  question  I  think,  with  Westcott 
and  a  majority  of  modern  interpreters,  that  the  trans- 
lation "  a  sin  "  is  too  definite.  If  the  apostle  had  in 
mind  some  particular  act  of  sin,  such  as  the  denial  of 
the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  (so  Ebrard  and  Diister- 
dieck),  or  envy  (so  Augustine)  it  seems  likely  that 
he  would  have  specified  it,  or  that  he  would,  at 
least,  have  written  dp^aprCa  rt?  or  piia.  Nor  may  we, 
on  the  other  hand,  make  the  expression  so  vague  and 
general  as  to  interpret  it  to  mean  a  state  of  extreme 
moral  obduracy  (so  Bengel).  We  should  rather 
understand  by  dfxapTia  here  a  certain  type  of  sin,  a 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  151 

kind  of  sinning  which  might  find  expression  in  many 
different  specific  acts,  all  of  which  would,  howevej-, 
spring  from  one  certain  spirit  or  disposition.  We 
think  it  probable  that  some  particular  attitude  or 
liabit  of  mind  must  have  been  in  the  apostle's  thoughts 
in  using  this  term.  The  question  what  this  sinful 
disposition  was  is  dependent  upon  the  view  which  is 
taken  of  our  second  inquiry. 

Several  points  connected  with  the  passage  as  a 
whole  require  to  be  taken  into  account  in  estimating 
the  force  of  a^jbapria  'jrpo<i  Odvarov.  From  the  very 
terms  of  the  passage  it  appears  that  the  apostle,  in 
the  case  which  he  supposes,  is  thinking  of  this  sin  as 
the  act  of  a  Christian,  or  at  least  of  a  professing 
Christian  :  "  If  any  man  see  his  brother  sinning,"  etc. 
It  would  seem  from  this  that  the  sin  in  question  is 
sometliing  which  is  in  a  special  manner  the  negation  of 
the  Christian  profession.  It  seems  also  probable  that 
other  descriptions  in  the  Epistle  of  specially  heinous 
sins  or  sin  would  throw  some  light  upon  the  meaning 
of  this  sin.  Bearing  in  mind  these  two  general  con- 
siderations, let  us  briefly  pass  in  review  the  leading 
theories  respecting  "  sin  unto  death  "  in  our  passage.^ 
It  is  well  known  that  this  passage  is  one  of  the  sup- 
ports of  the  distinctions  made  by  Roman  Catholic 
theologians  between  venial  and  mortal  sins.  The  latter 
are  such  as  destroy  the  friendship  of  God  and  cause 
the  death  of  the  soul.     They  are  seven  in  number: 

1  For  an  account  of  the  patristic  comments  on  the  passage, 
see  Westcott,  Epistles  of  St.  John,  pp.  210-214. 


152  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

pride,  covetousness,  lust,  anger,  gluttony,  envy,  and 
sloth.  But  even  if  a  valid  distinction  could  be  made 
between  these  particular  sins  and  all  others,  no  possi- 
ble ground  for  it  could  be  found  in  our  passage,  since 
in  no  case  can  d/xapTca  be  made  to  include  a  list  of 
seven  sins.  Many  earlier  interpreters  (as  Calvin  and 
Beza)  identify  "  sin  unto  death  "  with  the  blasphemy 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  spoken  of  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  (Matt.  xii.  31  sq. ;  Marli.  iii.  22  sq. ;  Luke 
xii.  10).  There  must  unquestionably  be  a  certain 
kinship  between  the  thoughts  expressed  by  the  two 
phrases,  but  they  cannot  be  strictly  identical,  because 
the  "  blasphemy "  of  which  the  Pharisees  stood  in 
danger  consisted  in  ascribing  the  gracious  works  of 
Jesus  to  demoniacal  sources,  and  involved  an  utter 
perversion  of  the  moral  nature,  while  the  "  sin  "  of  our 
passage  denotes  some  course  of  action  in  a  professed 
Christian  by  which  he  cuts  himself  off  from  eternal  life. 
To  substantially  the  same  opinion  as  that  given  above 
come  the  interpretations  of  Liicke,  Huther,  DeWette, 
and  Haupt,^  who  agree  in  explaining  the  expression  as 
denoting  forfeiture  of  spiritual  life  through  a  wilful 
apostasy  from  Christ  which  involves  a  crisis  of  the 
soul, —  a  deliberate  attitude  of  enmity  to  him  taken 
from  pure  love  of  sinning.  On  this  view  "  sin  unto 
death "  would  simply  be  a  name  for  consummate 
wickedness  as  shown  by  hostility  to  Christ.  If  John 
had  in  mind  precisely  this  moral  obduracy,  by  the 
very  nature  of  which  the  subject  is  already  excluded 

^   Commentaries,  in  loco. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  153 

from  salvation,  it  seems  strange  that  he  should  speak 
of  it  as  the  sin  of  a  "  brother "  and  should  put  his 
counsel  regarding  prayer  for  it  in  a  negative  and 
guarded  form. 

Bishop  Westcott  has  advanced  the  view  that  "  sin 
unto  death "  is  sin  "  which  in  its  very  nature  ex- 
cludes from  fellowship  with  Christians."  ^  He  thinks 
examples  would  be  :  hatred  of  the  brethren,  selfishness, 
and  faithlessness.  He  defines  dfxaprca  Trpoi  ddvarov  as 
sin  "  tending  to  death,  and  not  necessarily  involving 
death.  Death  is,  so  to  speak,  its  natural  consequence 
if  it  continue,  and  not  its  inevitable  issue  as  a  matter 
of  fact."  It  appears  to  me  that  this  interpretation  does 
not  really  distinguish  "  sin  unto  death "  from  any 
other  sin.  All  sin  tends  to  death  if  it  continue,  and 
even  if  some  sins,  such  as  those  named,  had  a  special 
effect  to  exclude  the  doer  of  them  from  Christian 
society,  it  would  not  thereby  be  proved  that  they  were 
inherently  worse  than  other  sins.  On  Dr.  Westcott's 
view  it  is  difficult  to  find  any  reason  for  the  apostle's 
hesitation  in  encouraging  his  readers  to  pray  for  the 
forgiveness  of  those  who  should  sin  unto  death. 

Those  interpreters  ^  seem  to  me  to  follow  the  indica- 
tions of  the  Epistle  who  hold  that  sin  unto  death  is 
the  disposition  or  temper  which  expresses  itself  in 
the  denial  of  Christ's  incarnation,  Messiahship,  and 
saving  work.  This  view  sets  our  passage  in  close 
relation  with  the  passages  concerning  antichrist,  and 

1  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  p.  203. 

2  See,  foi'  example,  Ebrard,  Commentary,  in  loco. 


154  THE  JOHANNIXE   THEOLOGY 

proceeds,  we  believe,  in  the  right  direction.  The  un- 
derlying thought  in  respect  to  the  antichristian  spirit 
and  in  respect  to  sin  unto  death  is  probably  the  same. 
But  the  latter  idea  need  not  be  made  so  definite  as  to 
mean  a  specific  act  of  denial,  but  may  most  natur- 
ally be  held  to  designate,  as  the  term  "  antichrist " 
does,  a  temper  of  denial,  a  renunciation,  on  the  part  of 
one  who  has  professed  discipleship  to  Christ,  of  the 
saving  significance  of  his  person  and  work.  We  there- 
fore hold  that  sin  unto  death  is  here  equivalent  in 
principle  to  the  spirit  of  antichrist,  and  consists  in 
apostasy  or  desertion  of  Christ.^  With  the  authors 
just  cited  we  hold  that  the  New  Testament  passages 
outside  our  Epistle  which  are  most  closely  analo- 
gous to  that  under  review  are  Hebrews  vi.  4-8  and 
X.  26-31,  in  which  apostasy  from  Christ  and  its  con- 
sequences are  depicted.  In  these  passages  the  thought 
probably  is.  If  a  man  deserts  Christ  he  will  find  no 
other  Saviour  ;  there  is  no  sacrifice  for  sins  (Heb.  x. 
26)  which  can  avail  for  him  except  that  which  Christ 
has  made.  Thus  the  impossibility  of  renewal  which  is 
asserted  in  case  of  any  who  have  fallen  away  (Heb. 
vi.  6)  is  not  absolute,  but  relative ;  it  is  an  impossi- 
bility which  lies  within  the  limits  of  the  supposition 
which  is  made  in  the  immediate  connection.  In  the 
case  of  one  who  turns  away  from  Christ,  and  so  long 

1  So  Holtzmann,  Hand-Commentar,  in  loco;  Weiss,  Bibl 
TheoL,  ii.  §  151  c.  note  10  (in  the  original  of  the  5th  ed.,  note 
8),  and  Dwight,  in  his  notes  appended  to  Huther's  Commentary 
on  the  Catholic  Epistles  (in  the  Meyer-series),  page  817. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   SIN  155 

as  such  apostasy  lasts  (note  the  preserit  participles 
avacTTavpovvra';  and  irapahwy ixaTCl^ovTa<i) ,  there  is  no 
possibility  of  renewal.^  This  view  alone  accords  with 
the  drift  and  purpose  of  the  Epistle  as  a  whole,  as 
the  view  which  makes  "  antichrist  "  and  "  sin  unto 
death "  in  1  John  refer  to  renunciation  of  Christ 
accords  with  the  aim  of  that  letter.  The  passages  in 
Hebrews  do  not  exclude  the  possibility  of  renewal 
in  case  the  course  of  apostasy  is  repented  of  and  for- 
saken ;  nor  do  the  passages  in  1  John  pronounce 
this  penalty  of  death  upon  any  who  turn  away 
from  the  path  of  denial  into  which  they  have  been 
beguiled.  The  idea  which  underlies  both  sets  of  pas- 
sages is  that  the  way  of  apostasy  is  the  road  to 
death  ;  that  renunciation  of  Christ  is  the  renuncia- 
tion of  God's  saving  mercy,  which  will  not  be  found 
.elsewhere.  This  fearful  goal,  to  which  the  repudia- 
tion of  Christ  will  inevitably  lead  those  who  persist 
in  it,  is  pointed  out  in  the  most  solemn  manner  by 
both  writers  in  order  that  their  readers  may  be 
warned  of  the  danger  to  which  they  are  exposed  in 
giving  heed  to  the  representatives  of  a  fanatical  and 
narrow  Judaism,  on  the  one  hand,  or  to  those  of  a 
proud  and  superficial  Gnosticism,  on  the  other. 

^  Cf.  Dwight's  notes  on  the  passage  in  Liinemann's  Commen- 
tary (Meyer-series),  p.  551,  and  Farrar  on  Hebrews,  in  loco,  in 
the  Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 


CHAPTER  VII 


THE   WORK   OF  SALVATION 


Literature.  —  Weiss:  Der  JoTiann.  Lehrb.,  Die  Errettung 
der  Welt,  157-164,  and  Blbl.  TheoL,  The  Salvation  in  Christ,  ii. 
347-36-2  (orig.  pp.  614-626 ) ;  Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.,Oi  the 
Influence  of  the  Word  upon  the  World,  ii.  429-445  (orig.  pp. 
479-498);  Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  TheoL,  Die  Heilsstiftung,  1. 
261-277,  Das  Heilswerk,  ii.  436-446  ;  Wendt  :  Teaching  of  Jesus, 
Significance  of  the  death  of  Jesus  according  to  the  Johannine 
discourses,  ii.  251-262  (orig.  pp.  530-539);  Sears,  The  Heart 
of  Christ,  The  ,Johannean  Atonement,  501-511 ;  Frommann  : 
Johann.  Lehrb.,  Jesus  ist  als  der  Christ  der  Heiland  der  Welt, 
418-480 ;  Kostlix  :  Der  Lehrbegriff,  u.  s.  w.,  Das  Werk  Jesu  iin 
Besondern,  160-209;  Baur:  Neutest.  J'AeoZ.,  Die  Lehre  von  der 
Erlosung,  368-389 ;  Dale  :  The  Atonement,  The  Testimony  of 
St.  John,  151-172. 

A  REVIEW  of  the  references  in  the  writings  of  John 
to  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ  may  well  begin  with 
the  claim  which  he  makes  for  himself  as  the  dis- 
penser of  life  and  as  the  bread  of  life  in  the  fifth  and 
sixth  chapters  of  the  Gospel.  The  way  in  which 
Jesus  is  led  to  assert  his  prerogative  as  the  giver  of 
life  (v.  19  sq^  is  significant.  He  had  healed  a  man 
on  the  Sabbath.  The  Jews  accused  him  of  profaning 
the  sacred  day.  He  replied  that  in  doing  good  on 
the  Sabbath  he  was  acting  in  accord  with  the  unceas- 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  157 

ing  beneficence  of  his  Father.  They  then  accused  him 
of  "  making  himself  equal  with  God  "  (v.  18).  This 
accusation  called  out  an  explanation  of  his  mis- 
sion. He  does  nothing,  he  says,  independently  of  the 
Father's  will  and  purpose  (verse  19)  ;  he  does  the 
same  things  as  the  Father  (verse  20),  "For  as  the 
Father  raiseth  the  dead  and  quickeneth  (^woTroiet) 
them,  even  so  the  Son  also  quickeneth  whom  he  will  " 
(verse  21).  These  words  should  probably  be  under- 
stood in  an  ethical  sense,  since  in  the  connection  he 
says :  "  He  that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  him 
that  sent  me,  hath  eternal  life,"  etc.  (verse  24),  and 
again:  "The  hour  cometh,and  now  is,  when  the  dead 
shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live  "  (verse  26).  A  present  bestowment  of 
spiritual  life,  on  condition  of  faith,  appears  to  be  meant. 
In  immediate  connection  with  this  right  to  bestow  life 
stands  its  counterpart,  the  right  to  pronounce  judg- 
ment (verses  22,  23).  Those  who  do  not  honor  the 
Son,  and  receive  the  message  which  the  Father  sends 
to  them  through  him,  are  inevitably  exposed  to  that 
process  of  judgment  which,  though  not  the  immediate 
object  of  his  coming  into  the  world  (viii.  15  ;  xii.  47), 
is  inseparable  from  his  Messianic  work.  The  Father 
has  made  him  the  bearer  of  life  to  tlie  world,  and 
through  his  incarnation  and  oneness  with  humanity, 
—  which  are  the  essential  conditions  of  his  achieving 
man's  redemption,  —  has  associated  with  this  saving 
work,  as  its  reverse  side,  the  execution  of  judgment 
(verses  26,  27),     At  this  point  a  transition  seems  to 


158  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

occur  in  the  thought,  which  now  passes  over  into  the 
future  and  dwells  for  a  moment  upon  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  life-giving  process :  "  Marvel  not  at  this : 
for  tlie  hour  cometli,  in  which  all  that  are  in  the 
tombs  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth,"  etc. 
(verse  28).  This  resurrection,  which  is  defined  as  a 
resurrection  "  of  life  "  or  "  of  judgment,"  according  to 
its  basis  (so  Weiss)  or  issue  (so  Meyer),  can  only  be 
that  which  is  conceived  of  as  taking  place  at  the  end 
of  the  current  age.  While  these  expressions  are  very 
explicit  in  ascribing  the  work  of  salvation,  both  in 
its  present  realization  and  its  future  completion,  to 
Christ,  they  are  too  general  to  indicate  clearly  by  what 
means  he  effects  this  salvation. 

After  the  miracle  of  the  loaves  (vi.  1-14)  many 
followed  Jesus  in  hope  of  securing  further  supply 
(vi.  26).  He  urges  them  to  seek  from  him  rather 
that  spiritual  food  which  he  has  come  to  provide  for 
them  (verse  27).  To  this  they  reply :  What  would 
you  have  us  do  ?  What  do  you  hold  that  God  re- 
quires of  us  ?  Jesus  answers  :  He  requires  no  deeds 
whereby  you  may  win  his  favor  ;  he  requires  only  that 
you  receive  and  obey  me  (verses  28,  29).  To  the  Jew- 
ish mind  the  question  at  once  presents  itself :  By 
what  miracle  do  you  sustain  your  claim  to  be  a  mes- 
senger of  God  and  the  bearer  of  life  to  the  world  ? 
(verse  30.)  Moses  attested  his  mission  by  giving  the 
people  manna :  "  what  workest  thou  ?  "  (verses  30,  31.) 

Such  were  the  preliminary  circumstances  which 
occasioned  the  discourse  on  the  bread  of  life.      The 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  159 

reference  to  the  manna  which  supplied  only  the  tem- 
porary physical  need  of  the  passing  hour  affords  Jesus 
an  opportunity  to  set  in  contrast  with  it  the  spiritual 
nourishment  whicli  he  gives  for  the  permanent  satis- 
faction of  the  soul.  He  tells  them  that  the  manna 
whicli  Moses  gave  them  was  not  the  true,  ideal  bread 
of  God  (rbi>  aprov  rov  a\i)6iv6v) ;  this  genuine  bread 
from  heaven  God  is  now  giving  (hihwaiv^  them  (verse 
32);  it  is  himself  (verse  35).  The  saying  gives  great 
offence  (verse  41),  but  Jesus  reasserts,  in  other  terms, 
his  claim  as  the  bearer  of  spiritual  life.  He  is  the 
way  to  the  Father  ;  he  is  the  giver  of  the  resurrection- 
life  (verse  44)  ;  those  who  really  hear  God's  voice 
recognize  his  message  as  divine ;  faith  in  him  is  the 
condition  of  eternal  life  (verses  45,  47).  This  stage 
of  the  discourse  reaches  its  culmination  in  the  repeated 
assertion  that  he  is  the  living  bread  from  heaven,  and, 
especially,  in  the  more  specific  statement  that  the  life- 
giving  bread  is  his  flesh,  which  he  will  give  for  the 
life  of  the  world  (verse  51), 

The  final  paragraph  of  the  discourse  presents  the 
thought  that  spiritual  life  is  secured  by  eating  the 
flesh  of  the  Son  of  man  and  drinking  liis  blood 
(verse  53).  What  is  its  import  ?  One  answer  is  that 
reference  is  here  made  to  the  Lord's  supper.  This 
was  the  prevailing  interpretation  among  the  Latin  and 
later  Greek  Church  fathers,  and  is  adopted  by  Roman 
Catholic  writers  and  by  several  modern  Protestant 
scholars.^     But  the  exegetical   difficulties   connected 

1  E.  g.,  by  Pfleiderer,  Harnack,  H.  Holtzmaiiii,  and,  in  a 
modified  form,  by  Plummer. 


160  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

with  this  view  are  very  great.  Jesus  speaks  of  a 
present  and  continuous  eating  and  drinking  (verses 
54,  56)  ;  moreover,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  Jesus 
as  referring  to  the  last  supper  in  an  argument  with  the 
Jews  at  a  time  so  far  in  advance  of  its  establishment, 
and  especially  in  terms  so  mystical  and  so  widely  dif- 
ferent from  those  actually  used  at  the  institution  of 
that  sacrament.  If  the  words  as  they  stand  are  re- 
ferred to  the  eucharist,  the  conclusion  can  hardly  be 
avoided  that  this  application  of  them  is  due  to  the 
writer  of  the  Gospel,  —  a  conclusion  of  which  those 
who  deny  its  genuineness  have  naturally  availed 
themselves.  Westcott  justly  criticises  this  interpre- 
tation as  follows  :  "  To  attempt  to  transfer  the  words 
of  the  discourse  with  their  consequences  to  the  sacra- 
ment is  not  only  to  involve  the  history  in  hopeless 
confusion,  but  to  introduce  overwhelming  difficulties 
into  their  interpretation,  which  can  only  be  removed 
by  the  arbitrary  and  untenable  interpolation  of  quali- 
fying sentences."  ^ 

The  prevailing  interpretation  among  Pj'otestants 
refers  the  words  to  the  propitiatory  death  of  Christ, 
This  was  the  opinion  of  Augustine  and  of  the  Re- 
formers, and  is  presented  in  the  commentaries  of 
Lange,  Godet  and  Meyer.  It  is  favored  by  the  follow- 
ing considerations :  (a)  The  term  /  tvill  give  (hwaoi, 
verse  51)  points  to  a  future  saving  act;  (6)  the  ex- 

1  Commentary,  in  loco.  For  a  detailed  refutation  of  the  in- 
tei-pretation  just  stated  above  in  the  text,  see  also  Meyer,  in 
loco. 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  161 

pression,  to  drink  his  blood,  necessarily  refers  to  his 
death;  (c?)  passages  like  i.  29,  iii.  14,  and  I.  iv.  10 
confirm  this  explanation.  All  three  of  these  points, 
however,  are  of  doubtful  validity.  It  is  improbable 
that  a  reference  to  the  death  of  Christ  can  be  legiti- 
mately derived  from  the  term  /  will  give  (Bcoaco'), 
either  on  account  of  the  tense  or  on  account  of  tlie 
significance  of  the  word  itself.  The  future  may  refer 
to  a  continuous  giving  of  himself  for  the  life  of  the 
world,  as  well  as  to  one  definite  act,  and  the  con- 
nection seems  to  show  that  the  verb  SiBovat  is  used 
throughout,  not  in  the  sense  of  giving  himself  up  to 
God  in  sacrifice,  but  in  that  of  giving  himself  as  food 
for  man's  nourishment  (^cf.  verses  31-34). 

The  reference  to  the  drinking  of  the  blood  of  the 
Son  of  man  (verse  58)  may  be  regarded  as  parallel 
to  that  which  is  made  to  the  eating  of  his  flesh.  If 
the  latter  does  not  necessarily  refer  to  his  expiatory 
death,  it  cannot  be  convincingly  shown  that  the 
former  does  so.  Certainly  the  fact  that  Christ  is  else- 
where spoken  of  as  the  Lamb  of  God  (i.  29)  and  as  a 
propitiation  for  our  sins  (I.  iv.  10),  does  not  of  itself 
prove  that  he  is  presented  in  the  same  light  in  the 
discourse  under  consideration.  It  is  almost  as  diffi- 
cult to  suppose  that  in  this  address  to  hostile  Jews 
Jesus  meant  to  dwell  on  the  necessity  of  his  sacrificial 
death  as  it  is  to  suppose  that  his  words  had  reference 
to  the  significance  of  the  last  supper.  It  would  seem 
that  his  meaning  must  have  been,  in  that  case,  al- 
together incomprehensible  to  his  hearers. 

11 


162  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

The  difficulties  attending  these  interpretations  have 
led  many  to  adopt  a  third  view  which  has,  indeed, 
been  held  in  varying  forms.  In  this  third  theory  the 
terms  fiesJi  and  hlood  are  understood  in  an  ethical  or 
mystical  sense,  and  the  eating  and  drinking  spoken 
of  are  supposed  to  include  the  entire  appropriation  of 
Christ  and  his  saving  work.  In  this  view  the  benefits 
of  his  death  would  be  logically  included,  though  not 
primarily  or  directly  referred  to  in  the  terms  flesh 
and  Hood.  These  words  are  regarded  as  symbols  of 
his  life  or  person.  Westcott  understands  by  the  flesh 
"  the  virtue  of  Christ's  humanity  as  living  for  us," 
and  by  the  hlood  "  the  virtue  of  his  humanity  as  sub- 
ject to  death."  ^  For  Weiss  the  flesh  and  hlood  to- 
gether symbolize  the  weakness  and  finitude  of  human 
nature  in  contrast  to  the  celestial  glory  of  the  spirit- 
ual nature.  The  eating  and  drinking  therefore  refer 
to  the  believing  reception  of  Jesus'  human  appearance 
in  his  lowly  form.^  Taking  a  similar  view  of  its 
terms,  Wendt  holds  that  the  discourse  is  intended  to 
confute  the  idea  of  the  Jews  that,  because  of  his 
well-known  human  origin  (verse  41  sg.),  Jesus  could 
not  be  the  medium  of  eternal  life  to  mankind.  Thus 
the  discussion  "  serves  for  the  confirmation  and  ex- 
planation of  the  thought  which  he  elsewhere  briefly 
expresses    by   his    self-designation   as    '  the    Son   of 

^  Commentary,  in  loco. 

2  Life  of  Christ,  iii.  7.  Weiss  adds  that  the  evangelist  sees 
in  these  words  intimations  of  Jesus'  violent  death,  —  an  idea 
which  is  not  involved  in  their  original  meaning. 


THE  WORK   OF   SALVATION  163 

man.' "  ^  Others  do  not  attempt  to  assign  distinct 
senses  to  the  words  flesh  and  hlood  or  to  find  in  the 
statements  concerning  them  any  specific  reference  to 
Jesus'  lowly  human  form,  but  understand  that  to  eat 
his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood  is  to  make  Christ  wholly 
ours,  to  participate  spiritually  in  his  life. 

Dr.  John  Lightfoot  confirms  this  view  by  citations 
from  Talmudic  sources.  In  connection  with  them  he 
says  :  "  There  is  nothing  more  common  in  the  schools 
of  the  Jews  than  the  phrases  of  '  eating  and  drinking  ' 
in  a  metaphorical  sense."  "  Bread  is  very  frequently 
used  in  the  Jewish  writers  for  doctrine.  So  that  when 
Christ  talks  of  eating  his  flesh,  he  might  perhaps  hint 
to  them  that  he  would  feed  his  followers  not  only  with 
his  doctrines,  but  with  himself  too."  One  Rabbi 
speaks  of  "  eating  the  years  of  the  Messiah  ; "  another 
of  "  devouring  "  him.  Lightfoot  concludes  :  "  To  par- 
take of  the  Messiah  truly  is  to  partake  of  himself,  his 
pure  nature,  his  righteousness,  his  spirit ;  and  to  live 
and  grow  and  receive  nourishment  from  that  partici- 
pation of  him,  —  things  which  the  Jewish  schools 
heard  little  of,  did  not  believe,  did  not  think  ;  but 
things  which  our  blessed  Saviour  expresseth  lively 
and  comprehensively  enough,  by  that  of  eating  his 
flesh  and  drinking  his  blood."  ^ 

It  appears  to  me  probable  that  this  third  interpre- 
tation corresponds  best  with  the  primary  import  of 
the  discourse.     It  is  not  impossible,  however,  that,  as 

^  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  182  (orig.  p.  475). 

*  HortB  Hehraicce,  in  loco,  Oxford  trans.,  iii.  307-309. 


164  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Weiss  suggests,  the  writer,  in  reproducing  the  sub- 
stance of  the  discourse  in  the  light  of  subsequent 
events,  thought  of  them  as  fulfilled  in  a  special  manner 
in  Jesus'  giving  up  his  body  to  death,  and  even  as 
directly  referring  to  this  event.  But  the  discourse  as 
a  whole  does  not  seem  to  warrant  the  supposition  of 
a  primary  and  direct  reference  to  his  atoning  death, 
and  in  seeking  an  answer  to  the  question,  how, 
according  to  the  Johannine  writings,  Jesus  effects 
man's  salvation,  we  are  not  carried  by  this  discourse 
beyond  the  general  truth  that  he  does  this  by  giving 
himself  to  men  as  spiritual  food,  or,  dropping  the  fig- 
ure, by  offering  himself  as  the  object  of  faith  and 
by  entering  into  loving  fellowship  with  men.  More 
specific  references  to  the  work  of  salvation  must  be 
sought  elsewhere. 

In  several  places  Christ  is  said  to  have  come  to 
save  men.  "  God  sent  not  the  Son  into  the  world  to 
judge  the  world ;  but  that  the  world  should  be  saved 
(Jva  (TwOr)  6  K6a/Jio<i)  through  him  "  (iii.  17 ;  cf.  xii.  47). 
The  connection  shows  that  "  the  world  "  designates 
mankind  in  general,  and  that  men  are  regarded  as 
exposed  —  apart  from  his  saving  work  —  to  condemna- 
tion or  destruction  (c/.  verse  16),  but  the  manner  in 
which  the  salvation  is  effected  is  not  intimated.  Faith 
in  himself  and  appropriation  of  the  light  which  he  has 
brought  to  men  are  spoken  of  (verses  18-21)  as  the 
conditions  of  the  divine  approval,  but  no  ground  of  for- 
giveness in  his  death  or  sacrifice  is  alluded  to.  Else- 
where, in  defending  himself  against  the  criticisms  of 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  165 

the  Jews,  he  affirms  that  although  the  testimony  of 
the  Baptist,  which  the  Jews  had  sought,  was  favor- 
able to  him,  he  does  not  himself  appeal  to  it  for  his 
own  advantage,  since  his  claims  bear  the  direct  au- 
thentication of  God,  and  adds  :  "  I  say  these  things  " 
(concerning  John's  testimony)  "tliit  ye  may  be 
saved  "  {iva  vfiek  (TcodijTe,  v.  34)  ;  it  is  for  i/our  sake, 
not  for  mine,  that  I  refer  to  John's  "  witness,"  in  the 
hope  that  you  may  heed  it  and  believe  on  me.  Here 
also  we  find  only  an  implied  reference  to  the  believ- 
ing acceptance  of  his  Messiahship  as  the  condition  of 
salvation. 

The   passage  in  the  allegory  of   the  Door  of  the 
Sheepfold  :  "  I  am  the  door :  by  me  if  any  man  enter 
in,  he  shall  be  saved  (acoOTja-erai),  and  shall  go  in  and 
go  out,  and  shall  find  pasture  "  (x.  9),  is  figurative, 
and  contains  only  the  general  idea  of  security  through 
Christ  from  harm  or  danger.     When  we  are  told  that 
"the  salvation  "  (ri  (rmTjjpia) —that  is,  the  promised, 
long-expected    Messianic    salvation  —  "  is   from   the 
Jews  "  (iv.  22),  it  is,  no  doubt,  implied  that  Jesus  is 
the  Saviour  who  brings  this  salvation ;  but  no  sugges- 
tion of  the  way  or  means  of  accomplishing  it  is  made. 
After  the  conversation  with  the  Samaritan  woman,  in 
which  the  foregoing  expression  occurs,  her  country- 
men declare  that  they  are  convinced  by  what  they 
have  heard  from  Jesus  himself  that  he  "  is  indeed  the 
Saviour  of  the  world  "  (iv.  42).     In  one  other  passage 
only  is  he  designated  as  the  Saviour  (I.  iv.  14)  but  the 
means  by  which  he  becomes  such  are  not  specified  — 


166  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

beyond  the  mention  of  confessing  him  and  abiding  in 
him  as  necessary  (verses  13,  15).  From  this  group 
of  passages  we  may  indeed  infer  the  sinfulness  of 
mankind  ;  salvation  is  from  sin  and  its  consequences, 
but  whether  by  an  atonement  for  sin  or  not,  we  have  as 
yet  no  indication.  Thus  far  the  whole  soteriology  of 
our  sources  may  be  summed  up  in  the  words  :  life- 
fellowship  with  Christ. 

There  are  two  passages,  standing  in  close  connec- 
tion in  the  First  Epistle,  in  which  reference  is  made 
to  the  cleansing  {KadapC^eiv)  of  men  from  sin  (i.  7,  9). 
The  apostle  had  declared  that  the  substance  of  the 
gospel  message  is  that  God  is  light  (verse  5) ;  it  fol- 
lows that  Christians  must  walk  in  the  light  (verse  6) ; 
in  so  doing  they  have  fellowship  with  one  another, 
and  the  blood  of  Jesus  cleanses  them  from  all  sin 
(verse  7).  The  thought,  then,  is  that  the  saving  effi- 
cacy of  Christ's  blood  is  experienced  only  by  those 
who  walk  in  the  light,  that  is,  those  who  desire  and 
strive  to  be  pure  and  Godlike.  The  author  now  ad- 
vances to  the  necessity  of  confession ;  if  Christians 
confess  their  sins  God's  faithfulness  to  his  promises 
and  to  his  very  nature  is  the  guaranty  of  their  for- 
giveness and  cleansing  (verses  8,  9).  It  will  be 
noticed  that  in  both  these  passages  it  is  the  cleansing 
of  the  Christian  from  the  sin  that  still  clings  to  him 
that  is  spoken  of,  and  that  in  one  case  (verse  9)  this 
cleansing  is  predicated  of  God,  in  the  other  (verse  7), 
of  the  blood  of  Jesus,  his  Son.  From  these  passages 
we  derive  the  same  general  conception  as  from  those 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  167 

which  speak  of  saving  men ;  namely,  that  Jesus  Christ 
wrought  a  deliverance  for  man  from  sin ;  and  also 
the  additional  idea  that  this  deliverance  stands  in 
some  way  connected  with  his  death,  since  his  blood  is 
said  to  be  the  means  of  cleansing.  It  is  further  evi- 
dent that  the  apostle  speaks  here,  not  of  a  juridical 
deliverance  or  acquittal,  but  of  an  actual  moral  puri- 
fication.i  It  seems  to  be  clearly  implied  in  the  first 
of  these  passages  (verse  7)  that  the  shedding  of 
Christ's  blood  is  the  culminating  act  in  his  saving 
work.  This  is  the  only  passage  in  John's  writings 
where  cleansing  from  sin  is  explicitly  attributed  to 
his  blood  or  death.  It  remains  to  be  seen  whether 
this  idea  is  clearly  implied  in  other  passages. 

Closely  resembling  the  passages  just  noticed  are 
two  others  in  which  the  taking  away  {aXpeiv)  of  sin  is 
ascribed  to  Jesus.  In  I.  iii.  5  it  is  stated  that  "  he  was 
manifested  to  take  away  sins  "  (iva  Ta<i  d^apTCa<i  ap-p), 
or  more  exactly, "  the  sins,"  the  sins  of  mankind.  The 
other  passage  contains  the  exclamation  of  the  Bap- 
tist when  he  saw  Jesus  approaching :  "  Behold,  the 
Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  (6  al'pcov}  the  sin 
of  the  world  !  "  (i.  29.)  Some  interpreters  have  taken 
aipcLv  in  the  first  passage  in  the  sense  of  to  bear  as 
a  sacrifice,  in  order  to  procure  forgiveness,^  and  this 
meaning  has  been  still  more  commonly  given  to  the 
word   in   the   second   passage.     But  while    acpetv   in 

1  So  Liicke,  Huther,  Haupt;  per  contra,  Weiss,  Bibl.  Theol. 
§  148,  b.  3. 

2  So,  e.  g.,  Liicke  and  De  Wette. 


168  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

itself  might  in  these  passages  mean  to  bear,  the 
Johannine  usage  strongly  favors  another  signification. 
The  word  is  uniformly  used  by  John  in  the  sense  of 
to  take  away  {cf.  xi.  48  ;  xv,  2  ;  xvii.  15  ;  xix.  31,  38). 
Moreover,  the  Septuagint  employs  (^epeiv  to  denote 
the  hearing  of  sin,  while  it  uses  atpetv  to  express  the 
idea  of  taking  aicay.  The  context  seems  clearly  to 
require  the  meaning  to  take  away  for  apy  in  I.  iii.  5, 
since  the  point  of  the  argument  lies  in  the  antagonism 
between  the  Christian  life  and  sin,  as  shown  by  the 
purpose  of  Christ's  manifestation,  namely,  to  take  away 
sins.  If  this  view  of  I.  iii.  5  be  adopted,  the  presump- 
tion that  o  alpwv  means  "  who  takes  away  "  is  greatly 
strengthened.^  In  that  case,  the  idea  expressed  in 
aipeLv  is  substantially  the  same  as  that  which  we 
found  in  KaOapi^eiv.  Especially  close  would  be  the 
connection  between  Li.  7  and  i.  29,  since  the  "blood" 
in  the  one  passage  corresponds  with  the  "  Lamb  "  in 
the  other,  and  each  term  suggests  the  idea  of  a  sacri- 
ficial victim. 

On  the  interpretation  of  6  atpo)v  in  i.  29  which  we 
think  to  be  best  supported,  the  question  whether  the 
sacrificial  idea  is  found  in  the  passage,  will  turn 
chiefly  on  the  meaning  of  the  phrase:  "the  Lamb 
of  God."  The  sense  in  which  we  have  taken  aipeiv  is 
not  prejudicial  to  this  idea  in  the  passage,  since  it 
may  appear  that  the  sin  of  the  world  is  conceived  of 
as  taken  away  only  through  the  expiation  of  it  in  the 

^  Among  the  interpreters  who  render  6  a'ipcov  "who  takes 
away,"  are  Meyei',  Westcott,  Weiss,  Godet,  and  Plummer. 


THE   WORK  OF    SALVATION  169 

sufferings  and  death  of  Christ.  The  grammatical 
force  of  the  phrase,  as  determined  by  the  article  and 
the  genitive,  seems  clearly  to  be  :  the  expected  Lamb 
which  God  has  furnished  or  appointed,  that  is,  the 
Lamb  which  God  has  set  apart  to  a  special  function, 
and  of  which  prophecy  speaks.  In  the  view  of  many 
the  reference  of  the  term  is  to  the  paschal  lamb. 
This  lamb  was  the  symbol  of  Israel's  deliverance 
from  bondage,  and  Jesus  may  be  regarded  as  the 
antitypical  passover  Lamb  inasmuch  as  he  accom- 
plishes for  men  their  deliverance  from  sin.  It  seems 
unnatural,  however,  to  suppose  that  the  Baptist 
should,  at  this  time,  have  regarded  Jesus  in  this  spec- 
ial character ;  and  this  impression  is  somewhat 
strengthened  if  the  view  be  taken  that  in  the  quota- 
tion in  xix.  36  :  "A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken," 
the  reference  is  not  to  the  paschal  lamb  (Ex.  xii. 
46  ;  Num.  ix.  12),  but  to  the  description  of  Jehovah's 
protection  of  the  righteous  man  in  Ps.  xxxiv.  20.  But 
even  if  the  apostle  John  does  identify  Jesus,  after  his 
death,  with  the  paschal  lamb  (as  Paul  clearly  does, 
1  Cor.  V.  7),  a  similar  reference  in  our  passage  would 
not  thereby  be  rendered  especially  probable,  except 
on  the  view  that  this  conception  was  imported  into 
the  Baptist's  words  by  the  evangelist  ex  eventu. 

It  seems,  on  all  accounts,  more  natural  to  suppose 
that  the  phrase  "  the  Lamb  of  God "  is  a  reminis- 
cence of  Isaiah  liii.  7,  where  the  meekness  of  the 
suffering  Servant  of  Jehovah  is  depicted  by  saying : 
"  As  a  lamb  that  is  led  to  the  slaughter,  and  as  a 


170  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

sheep  that  before  her  shearers  is  dumb ;  yea,  he 
opened  not  his  mouth."  Some  interpreters,  connect- 
ing our  passage  with  Isaiah  liii.  7,  and  regarding  the 
latter  only  as  a  figurative  description  of  the  inno- 
cence and  patience  of  the  Servant,  conclude  that  the 
phrase  "  the  Lamb  of  God "  does  not  carry  with  it 
the  sacrificial  idea,  but  merely  characterizes  Jesus  as 
the  meek  and  gentle  sufferer.  But  the  sacrificial 
import  of  the  passage  Isaiah  liii.,  taken  as  a  whole, 
and  especially  of  verses  10-12,  renders  this  view  im- 
probable. Moreover,  the  recognition  of  a  connection 
between  our  passage  and  Isaiah  liii.  7  does  not  war- 
rant the  conclusion  that  the  phrase  under  review  is 
strictly  limited  in  its  meaning  by  the  latter.  The 
phrase  "Lamb  of  God"  is  most  naturally  taken  as 
an  Old  Testament  symbol  of  a  sacrificial  victim, 
through  the  offering  of  which  sin  is  done  away. 
Similar  allusions  to  Christ  as  the  Lamb  who  dies  in 
sacrifice  for  men  are  found  in  1  Pet.  i.  19,  and  in 
numerous  passages  in  the  Apocalypse  {e.  ^.,  v.  12 ; 
vii.  14).  To  me  it  appears  highly  probable  that  we 
have  in  our  passage  a  symbolical  expression,  drawn 
from  the  Old  Testament,  for  the  sacrificial  expiation 
of  sin.  If  so,  we  must  regard  this  idea  as  an  element 
of  the  Johannine  soteriology.  But  the  justice  of  this 
conclusion  will  be  found  to  be  mainly  dependent  upon 
considerations  connected  with  other  passages  yet  to 
be  examined. 

In  one  passage  (I.  ii.  1)  Christ  is  called  a  irapd- 
K\r]To<;  with  or  before  the  Father  (Tr/ao?  rov  TraTepa)  : 


THE  WORK  OF   SALVATION  171 

"If  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  Advocate  with  the 
Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous."  The  word 
irapdKXrjTo^  designates  Christ  as  one  who  is  sum- 
moned to  our  aid  and  who  represents  us  in  relation 
to  (7r/309)  the  Father.  This  passage  does  not,  how- 
ever, aid  us  in  defining  specifically  the  way  in  which 
Christ  effects  man's  salvation.  It  bears  mainly  upon 
the  mediation  of  Christ  in  securing  forgiveness  to  the 
Christian  man  who  falls  into  sin  (afxaprri^  note  the 
aorist).  The  thought  is ;  If  the  Christian  commits 
sin  (in  contrast  to  living  in  an  habitual  state  of  sin, 
I.  iii.  6-9)  he  has  as  his  Advocate  before  the  "  right- 
eous Father"  (xvii.  25)  the  sinless  One  who,  having 
himself  perfectly  fulfilled  his  moral  destiny  in  his 
human  life,  enters  into  perfect  sympathy  with  those 
who  are  passing  through  the  same  process  of  trial. 
The  passage  bears,  not  upon  the  cause  or  ground  of 
salvation,  but  upon  its  completion  in  the  Christian 
man. 

There  are  several  passages  in  which  some  act  of 
Christ,  usually  his  death,  is  said  to  have  been  on 
behalf  of  (inrep)  men.  The  first  of  these,  "  The  bread 
which  I  will  give  is  my  flesh,  for  {virep)  the  life  of  the 
world  "  (vi.  51),  we  have  already  noticed  incidentally 
in  our  review  of  the  discourse  on  the  bread  of  life. 
On  the  interpretation  of  that  discourse  which  I  have 
adopted,  a  reference  in  these  words  to  the  death  of 
Jesus  for  men  cannot  be  confidently  affirmed.  For 
our  present  purpose  this  passage  may  be  passed  over, 
both  because  of  the  uncertainty  of  its  meaning  and 


172  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

because  other  passages  are  unambiguous  upon  the 
point  in  question.  In  the  allegory  of  the  Good  Shep- 
herd, Jesus,  describing  himself  as  "  the  good  shep- 
herd "  says  that  he  "  lays  down  his  life  for  (inrip)  the 
sheep"  (x.  11,  15).  It  is  a  question  how  far,  in  view 
of  the  figurative  language  of  this  whole  description, 
we  can  draw  doctrinal  inferences  respecting  the  sig- 
nificance of  Christ's  death  from  these  words.  If  we 
consult  the  analogy  made  use  of  here  we  should  say, 
the  shepherd  can  only  lay  down  his  life  in  the  protection 
of  the  sheep  from  danger ;  the  parable  does  not  carry 
us  beyond  the  thought  of  the  most  self-denying  sacri- 
fice on  the  part  of  Christ  for  those  whom  he  loves. 
Some  interpreters, however  {e.g.,  Meyer,  in  loco),  find 
the  expiatory  idea  here  in  the  verb  (rid-qaiv')  which  is 
used.  It  is  claimed  that  the  phrase  ndevai  r-qv  yjrv^^Tjv 
means  to  pay  down  one's  life  as  a  ransom,  in  accord- 
ance with  a  frequent  classical  usage,  and  on  the  anal- 
ogy of  the  expression  to  give  one's  life  (^BiBovai  ttjv 
■^vx/jv.  Matt.  XX.  28 ;  cf.l  Tim.  ii.  6).  In  these  pas- 
sages the  idea  of  a  ransom  is  plainly  expressed,  and 
the  force  of  the  phrase  rtOevat  Trjv  '\^v')(rjv  cannot 
fairly  be  determined  by  simple  comparison  with  them. 
The  phrase  in  question  is  used  in  the  New  Testament 
only  by  John  (x.  11,  15,  17,  18;  xiii.  37,  38;  xv.  13 ; 
I.  iii.  16).  This  writer  elsewhere  employs  the  verb 
rtOevai  chiefly  in  the  sense  of  to  lay  away  (xi.  34; 
xix.  41 ;  XX.  2,  13,  15),  or  to  lay  aside  (xiii.  4). 
Westcott  thinks  that  "  the  usage  of  St.  John  rather 
suggests  the  idea  of  putting  off  and  laying  aside  as  a 


THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION  173 

robe,"  than  the  laying  down  of  a  ransom  price.  It  is 
certain  that  the  passages  outside  of  this  parable  where 
our  phrase  is  used  do  not  support  the  idea  of  paying 
a  ransom,  e.  //.,  xiii.  37  where  Peter  says  :  "  I  will  lay 
down  my  life  for  thee  "  {rrjv  y^vy^rjv  iiov  virep  crov  Orjaoi). 
When  in  xv.  13  Jesus  alludes  to  his  death  he  does  so 
under  terms  of  friendship  which  do  not  suggest  the 
ransom-idea :  "  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this, 
that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends  "  (tW  rt? 
rr]V  ■\^v')(rjV  avrov  dr/  vrrep  twv  (f)L\oiv  avrov).  In  the 
remaining  passage  (I.  iii.  16)  the  apostle  makes  the 
laying  down  of  Christ's  life  for  men  parallel  to  that 
laying  down  of  life  for  one  another  which  is  the  duty  of 
Christians,  and  expresses  both  acts  in  the  same  terms  : 
"  He  laid  down  his  life  for  us  (eKelvo^  virep  rjfiMv  rrjv 
^jrvx^fjv  avTov  eOrjKev'),  and  we  ought  to  lay  down  our 
lives  for  the  brethren  "  (vTrep  rwv  aheXc^oiV  ra?  i/rupj^a? 
Oelvai).  Surely  no  payment  of  life  as  a  ransom-price 
can  be  thought  of  in  the  mutual  laying  down  of  life 
for  one  another  among  Christians ;  if  not,  it  is  un- 
warranted to  derive  this  idea  from  the  parallel 
phrase. 

The  opinion  of  Meyer  does  not  seem  to  be  war- 
ranted by  the  facts  of  the  case.  The  substitutionary 
idea  can  be  derived  from  the  references  to  the  giv- 
ing of  his  life  by  the  good  shepherd  only  in  case  the 
preposition  virep  can  be  shown  to  involve  this  idea. 
This  preposition  strictly  means  on  behalf  of,  for  the 
benefit  of,  and  not  instead  of  (^o.vtl').  It  is  more  gen- 
eric than  avTi,  and  might  comprehend  its  idea  if  the 


174  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

connection  required.  One  might  die  for  the  benefit  of 
another  by  dying  in  that  other's  stead,  but  he  might 
do  so  in  other  ways  also.  In  the  present  instance 
the  figure  of  the  good  shepherd  in  his  relation  to  his 
sheep,  warrants  us  in  saying  that  Jesus,  according  to 
the  parable,  held  his  life  at  the  service  of  men,  and 
when  the  occasion  arose  laid  down  his  life  that  they 
might  live.  As  the  faithful  shepherd  dies  in  protect- 
ing his  sheep  from  wild  beasts  or  robbers,  so  Jesus 
dies  to  save  men  from  sin  and  death.  The  analogy 
would  suggest  that  this  death  is  experienced  in  the 
course  of  an  effort  to  save  men  by  other  means  ;  that 
it  represents  the  culmination  of  effort  to  secure  that 
end,  but  it  would  be  unwarranted  thus  to  limit  the 
thought  by  the  terms  of  the  allegorical  form.  We 
think  that  the  passages  under  review,  fairly  interpreted, 
teach  that  the  death  of  Jesus  is  a  means  to  man's 
rescue  from  sin  and  its  consequences.  This  conclu- 
sion, however,  we  should  regard  as  somewhat  doubtful 
did  these  passages  stand  alone.  It  may  be  escaped 
by  separating  these  clauses  in  which  virep  occurs  from 
others  found  elsewhere,  and  by  adhering  strictly  to  the 
limits  of  the  parabolic  analogy.  In  any  case  our 
passages  do  not,  on  our  interpretation,  indicate  in 
what  way  or  on  what  ground  the  death  of  Christ  avails 
for  man's  salvation.  Respecting  the  two  passages 
just  passed  in  review  (vi.  51 ;  x.  11),  we  must  agree 
with  Weiss  in  saying :  "  In  both  images  there  is  noth- 
ing said  of  any  bearing  of  punishment,  but  of  a  ser- 
vice of  love,  which  Jesus  discharges  to  the  world  by 


THE   WORK   OF  SALVATION.  175 

giving  his  life,  in  that  he  thereby  delivers  it  from  death 
and  keeps  it  in  life."  ^ 

The  next  passage  in  which  the  relation  of  the  death 
of  Christ  to  men  is  denoted  by  vTrep  is  that  where  the 
high  priest  Caiaphas  is  said  to  have  uttered  an  un- 
conscious prophecy  of  the  necessity  and  purport  of 
Christ's  death  (xi.  47-53).  The  passage  presents 
considerable  critical  difficulties,  but  the  meaning 
which  appears  on  the  face  of  the  narrative  is  as  fol- 
lows :  In  a  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin  the  Pharisees 
express  their  concern  because  so  many  of  their  fellow- 
countrymen  have  believed  on  Jesus.  They  argue : 
If  he  is  permitted  to  go  on  winning  adherents  thus 
without  interruption,  the  attention  of  our  Roman 
rulers  will  surely  become  directed  to  the  matter. 
They  will  regard  the  excitement  attending  adherence 
to  this  pretended  Messiah  and  King  as  a  sign  of  pos- 
sible sedition,  and  they  will  promptly  destroy  forever 
the  remnant  of  independence  which  is  now  ours  ;  they 
will  annihilate  our  holy  city  and  completely  extin- 
guish our  national  life  (xi.  47,  48).  To  this  argument 
Caiaphas,  who  was  high  priest  during  that  fateful  year, 
answered :  You  Pharisees  are  altogether  lacking  in 
shrewdness.  We  can  turn  this  whole  situation  to  our 
advantage.  By  sacrificing  Jesus  we  can  show  our 
loyalty  to  Rome,  and  thus  avert  all  possible  suspicion 
from  ourselves.  Thus  he,  not  the  Jewish  people,  will 
perish.  Let  the  penal  stroke,  which  you  so  much 
fear,  descend  upon  him,  instead  of  us. 

1  Bihl.  Theol.  §  148,  c. 


176  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

It  is  clear  that  the  suggestion  of  Caiaphas  was  dic- 
tated by  selfish  policy.  It  is  through  wicked  enmity 
to  Jesus,  and  cruel  betrayal  of  him,  that  the  advantage 
of  his  death  is  to  be  secured  to  the  people.  They  are 
to  shield  themselves  by  turning  base  injustice  to 
Jesus  into  a  semblance  of  devotion  to  Rome  (verses 
49,  50 ;  cf.  xviii.  14).  On  this  counsel  of  Caiaphas 
the  evangelist  now  makes  a  comment  based  upon  the 
Old  Testament  idea  of  the  high  priest  as  the  recipient 
of  oracular  communications  from  Jehovah  (Ex.  xxviii. 
30 ;  Num.  xxvii.  21).  He  says  that  the  very  words 
which  Caiaphas  uttered  in  a  worldly  and  wicked 
spirit  contained,  despite  his  purpose,  a  great  divine 
truth ;  he,  in  virtue  of  his  sacred  office,  was  made  the 
organ  of  a  word  of  God  of  which  he  was  all  uncon- 
scious. His  words — little  as  he  meant  them  so  — 
express  the  great  truth  that  Jesus  was  to  die  for 
(vTrep)  the  Jewish  nation,  and  not  only  that,  but  that 
by  his  death  he  was  to  gather  together  into  a  spiritual 
unity  all  those  in  every  nation  who  are  true,  obedient 
sons  of  God  (verses  51,  52).  Whatever  view  we  may 
take  of  John's  assertion  of  a  divine  determination  con- 
trolling the  words  of  Caiaphas  and  directing  them  to 
the  expression  of  truth  wholly  foreign  to  the  mind  of 
the  speaker,  it  is  evident  that  the  whole  narrative 
assumes  it  to  be  a  great  central  truth  of  Christianity 
that  Jesus  died  to  save  the  Jewish  nation,  and  to 
constitute  all  the  children  of  God  into  one  family. 
Moreover,  as  in  I.  i.  7  fellowship  among  Christians 
and   their   cleansing  from   all   sin  by  the   blood  of 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  177 

Christ  were  placed  side  by  side,  so  here  we  have  a 
correlation  of  the  idea  of  salvation  and  of  Christian 
unity  as  together  representing  the  object  of  Christ's 
death.  For  our  purpose  the  main  point  to  be  noted 
is  the  way  in  which  the  whole  narrative  assumes 
the  centrality  of  the  truth  that  Christ's  death  was 
the  means  of  effecting  the  Messianic  salvation  for  the 
Jewish  nation,  and  of  constituting  the  one  communion 
of  true  believers.  But  in  wliat  sense,  in  the  light  of 
our  passage,  does  Christ  die  for  {virep)  men  ?  We 
certainly  cannot  carry  the  idea  of  a  divine  overruling 
of  Caiaphas'  words  so  far  as  to  find  in  them  the  true 
conception  of  Jesus'  vicarious  death.  To  the  high 
priest's  mind  his  death  would  be  the  result  of  crafty 
policy,  whereby  suspicion  of  political  treachery  should 
be  averted  from  the  Jewish  people.  He  did  not  con- 
nect the  death  of  Christ  with  God's  order,  or  contem- 
plate it  as  subserving  moral  and  spiritual  ends.  Our 
passage,  then,  does  not  involve  more  than  the  asser- 
tion which  the  evangelist  held  to  be  fundamental  and 
axiomatic,  that  Christ  secured  the  salvation  of  men 
by  his  death ;  but  to  the  questions,  why,  or  in  what 
way,  our  author  gives  us,  as  yet,  no  answer. 

In  XV.  13  Jesus  refers  to  his  laying  down  his  life 
as  a  proof  of  his  great  love  :  "  Greater  love  hath  no 
man  than  this,  that  a  man  lay  down  life  for  (virep) 
his  friends."  It  accords  with  the  purpose  of  the  dis- 
course in  which  this  passage  occurs  that  Jesus  should 
speak  of  his  death  here  as  being  experienced  for  the 
benefit  of  his  immediate   disciples,  without   thereby 

12 


178  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

justifying  any  limitation  of  its  intended  benefits.  But 
the  passage  does  not  carry  us  beyond  those  previ- 
ously cited  in  respect  to  the  way  in  which  his  death 
secures  the  benefits  to  which  the  preposition  points. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  the  kindred  passage  I.  iii. 
16 :  "  Hereby  know  we  love,  because  he  laid  down 
his  life  for  (yirep^  us :  and  we  ought  to  lay  down  our 
lives  for  (yirep)  the  brethren."  In  this  case,  how- 
ever, if  we  are  to  press  the  parallelism,  we  should 
have  to  conclude  that  the  death  of  Jesus  is  for  the 
benefit  of  men  only  in  the  sense  in  which  self-sacri- 
ficing suffering  on  the  part  of  men  is  for  the  benefit 
of  its  objects.  The  context  shows  that  in  this  pas- 
sage the  death  of  Jesus  stands  as  a  symbol  of  self- 
sacrificing  love  which  men  are  to  share  and  illustrate. 
That  this  is,  in  general,  its  entire  significance  in 
John,  would  be,  however,  an  unwarranted  conclusion. 

The  words  "  For  their  sakes  (yrrep  avroiv)  I  sanc- 
tify (^d'yid^w)  myself,  that  the)^  themselves  also  may 
be  sanctified  in  truth  "  (xvii.  19)  are  understood  by 
most  interpreters  ^  in  a  sacrificial  sense,  and  djid^eiv 
is  taken  as  equivalent  to  Trpoac^epeiv  Ovaiav  (Chrysos- 
tom,  cf.  Eph.  V.  2).  On  this  view  the  meaning  would 
be :  For  the  salvation  of  my  disciples  I  consecrate 
myself,  througli  death,  as  a  sacrifice  unto  God.  This 
explanation  is  sustained  by  Septuagint  examples  of 
the  use  of  dytd^etv  in  the  sense  of  consecration  to  death 
in  sacrifice  (Ex.  xiii.  2  ;  Deut.  xv.  19,  etc.).  Consider- 
ations draAvn  from  the  connection  in  which  our  pas- 

^  So,  e.  (/.,  Llicke,  DeWette,  Meyer,  Weiss,  H.  Holtzniann. 


THE   WORK  OF   SALVATION  179 

sage  stands,  however,  render  this  view,  to  say  the 
least,  very  doubtful.  Jesus  prays  for  the  consecra- 
tion of  his  disciples  (xvii.  17),  and  adds  that  he  conse- 
crates himself  for  them  that  they  themselves  also  {/cat 
avro^  may  be  consecrated  in  truth  (xvii.  19).  It  seems 
incredible  that  dytd^eLv  as  applied  to  the  disciples 
should  refer  to  tlieir  consecration  to  death  as  martyrs 
(so  Chrysostom),  and,  if  it  did,  the  usage  would  not 
be  parallel  to  that  in  which  it  applies  to  Jesus,  who, 
according  to  the  supposition,  dies,  not  as  a  martyr, 
but  as  a  sacrifice.  The  language  of  verse  19  most 
naturally  "  implies  two  consecrations  of  a  homogene- 
ous character  "  (Godet).  It  seems  unnatural  to  attrib- 
ute, as  Weiss  does,  a  double  sense  to  dyid^etv  in  the 
passage.  It  appears  to  me  preferable  to  understand 
the  words  comprehensively  of  Christ's  whole  devotion 
of  himself  to  his  appointed  work,  which  would  include 
his  life  as  well  as  his  death.  The  thought  is  unduly 
narrowed  by  Neander,  who  defines  Christ's  self-con- 
secration as  "  the  realization  of  the  ideal  of  holi- 
ness." ^  The  phrase  more  naturally  denotes  that 
whole  self-giving  of  Jesus  to  men  by  which  he  be- 
comes the  author  and  finisher  of  their  salvation.^ 

Jesus  implies  the  necessity  of  his  death  for  the  real- 
ization of  his  saving  work  in  the  statement,  "  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  except  a  grain  of  wheat  fall 
into  the  earth  and  die,  it  abideth  by  itself  alone ;  but 
if  it  die,  it  beareth  much  fruit  "  (xii.  24).    But  neither 

^  Planting  and  Training,  ii.  39  (Bohn  ed.). 
*  So,  substantially,  (lodet  and  Westcott. 


180  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

the  figure  in  which  the  principle  of  sacrifice  is  pre- 
sented, nor  the  context  of  the  passage,  suggests  the 
idea  of  vicarious  or  sacrificial  death.  The  principle 
is  directly  applied  to  the  life  of  the  disciples,  who  are 
not  to  "  love  "  their  lives,  but  to  "  hate  "  them  (xii.  25), 
that  is,  not  to  withhold  from  others  their  interest,  sym- 
pathy, and  efforts,  but  freely  to  give  them.  To  follow 
Christ  in  a  life  of  service  and  self-giving  is  the  prac- 
tical thought  of  the  passage,  "  If  any  man  serve  me, 
let  him  follow  me  "  (xii.  26). 

The  necessity  of  Jesus'  death  is,  however,  presented 
in  other  terms :  "  As  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in 
the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted 
up  {ir\lrcodi]vai  8el) :  that  whosoever  believeth  may  in 
him  have  eternal  life  "  (iii.  14,  15 ;  cf.  xii.  34).  The 
comparison  here  made  involves  (a)  that  as  the  brazen 
serpent  was  lifted  up  on  a  pole  (Num.  xxi.  8  sq.),  so 
Jesus  must  be  lifted  up  on  the  cross  (cf.,  especially, 
viii.  28) ;  and  (b)  that,  as  looking  upon  the  serpent  se- 
cured healing,  so  belief  on  the  crucified  One  secures 
eternal  life.  This  passage  and  those  in  which  Jesus 
is  described  as  the  Lamb  of  God  (i.  29,  36)  it  is  par- 
ticularly important  to  bear  in  mind  in  seeking  to 
determine  the  idea  which  underlies  the  assertions  of 
his  voluntary  devotion  of  his  life  for  the  good  of  men. 

Again,  Jesus  says  :  "  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from 
the  earth,  will  draw  all  men  unto  myself  "  (xii.  32), 
which  the  evangelist  explains  by  saying :  "  This  he 
said,  signifying  by  what  manner  of  death  he  should 
die  "  (xii.  33).     Here  the  cross  seems  to  be  thought  of. 


THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION  181 

not  only  as  the  symbol  of  death,  but  of  exaltation  above 
and  beyond  the  earth  (e/c  rr)?  jr}^).  The  combination 
of  ideas  is  similar  to  that  which  is  presented  by  Paul 
in  Phil.  ii.  8,  9,  where  the  humiliation  to  the  death  of 
the  cross  is  presented  as  the  ground  of  the  exalta- 
tion. Since  the  heavenly  reign  and  kingly  authority 
of  Jesus  were  attained  on  the  path  of  suffering,  the 
cross  may  fitly  stand,  not  only  as  the  symbol  of  the 
suffering,  but  of  its  result  also.  In  asserting  that  in 
consequence  of  being  lifted  up  on  the  cross  he  would 
exert  his  great  attractive  power  upon  mankind,  Jesus 
seems  not  only  to  have  signified,  as  John  affirms,  the 
manner  of  his  death,  but  also  to  have  proclaimed  the 
ground  of  his  exaltation  and  the  impelling  motive  of 
his  matchless  influence  in  the  world. 

The  two  most  important  passages,  in  their  bearing 
on  the  Johannine  idea  of  atonement,  are  found  in 
the  First  Epistle :  "  He  is  the  propitiation  (tXao-^d?) 
for  (Trept)  our  sins,"  etc.  (ii.  2),  and,  "  Herein  is  love, 
not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved  us,  and  sent 
his  Son  to  be  the  propitiation  (IXaafio^)  for  (Trepi)  our 
sins  "  (iv.  10).  These  are  the  only  passages  in  which 
any  of  the  technical  terms  which  express  the  ideas  of 
atonement,  reconciliation,  or  propitiation  {icaraWda- 
<7€LV,  KUTaWay}],  IXda-Keadai,  IXaar^piov^  k.  t.  X.) 
occur  in  the  Johannine  writings;  they  are  also 
the  only  passages  in  which  the  word  l\a(rf/,6^,  on 
which  their  meaning  chiefly  turns,  is  found  in  the 
New  Testament. 

In  order  rightly  to  estimate  the  force  of  these  past- 


182  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

sages  it  is  necessary  to  give  a  brief  account  of  the 
Biblical  use  of  IXda/cecrOaL  and  its  kindred  forms.^  In 
the  Septuagint  the  two  principal  uses  of  l\a<T[x6<i  (and 
of  its  strengthened  form  i^iXaafio'i)  are,  (a)  as  the 
equivalent  of  D'las,  "coverings  "  [of  sin  by  sacrifice], 
meaning  atonement  or  expiation  (e.g.,  Lev.  xxv.  9; 
Num.  V.  8) ;  (b)  as  a  translation  of  rixon,  sin  offer- 
ing (Ezek.  xliv.  27 ;  xlv.  19) ;  and  (c)  in  the  sense  of 
nn'Sp,  forgiveness  (Ps.  cxxx.  4 ;  Dan.  ix.  9).  The  verb 
IXda-KeaOai  and  its  compound  i^iXdaKeaOai  are  chiefly 
used  to  translate  is?,  to  cover,  that  is,  to  atone  for, 
sin.  The  subject  of  the  action,  expressed  or  implied, 
is,  in  this  usage,  God  or  some  human  agent ;  the  object 
is  the  sins  expiated,  expressed  in  the  accusative  (Ps. 
Ixv.  4),  dative  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  38),  or  after  irepv  (Lev. 
V.  18)  or  vTre'p  (Ezek.  xlv.  17)  ;  the  verb  is  also  used 
to  translate  nbo,  to  forgive,  and  in  the  passive  signi- 
fies to  be  merciful  (as  in  Luke  xviii.  13).  This  verb  is 
found  but  twice  in  the  New  Testament,  in  both  in- 
stances in  accord  with  Septuagint  usage.  In  Luke 
xviii.  13,  IXdaOrjTi  fxoc  tw  dfiaprcoXo)  means,  be  propi- 
tious, etc.,  as  in  2  Kings  v.  18,  IXdaerat  ra  hov\(p;  cf. 
Ps.  xxv.  11 ;  Ixxix.  9.  In  Hebrews  ii.  17  the  phrase 
et?  TO  tXdaK€a6at  ra?  dfiapTLa<i  rov  Xaov  corresponds 
to  the  prevailing  Septuagint  usage,  and  means,  "  in 

^  For  a  full  exhibition  of  the  Septuagint  usage  I  would  refer 
to  Westcott's  note  on  the  subject  in  his  Epistles  of  St.  John,  pp. 
85-87.  The  Biblical  use  of  this  and  other  terms  bearing  upon 
the  doctrine  of  atonement  is  fully  discussed  in  Creraer's 
Bibl.-Theol.  Lexicon,  sub  voce,  and  in  Trench's  New  Testament 
Synonyms. 


THE   WORK   OF   SALVATION  183 

order  (as  high  priest)  to  expiate  by  sacrifice  the  sins 
of  the  people." 

Attention  has  often  been  called  —  and  justly  —  to 
the  difference  between  the  classical  and  the  Bibli- 
cal use  of  this  class  of  words.  In  Homer  and  most 
ancient  authors  IXda/ceadaL  means  to  render  the  gods 
favorable  by  sacrifices  or  prayers,  —  the  assumption 
being  that  they  are  not,  apart  from  these  appeasing 
acts,  disposed  to  be  favorable  to  men.  In  Biblical 
Greek  the  conception  is  quite  different ;  only  in 
Zech,  vii.  2,  do  we  find  any  expression  which  seems 
to  answer  to  the  idea  of  IXdaKeaOai  tov  6e6v.  There 
the  phrase  is,  i^iXdaaaOat  tov  Kvpiov,  which,  as  the 
context  and  the  Hebrew  show,^  is  not  used  in  a  sac- 
rificial sense,  but  means  to  implore  or  "  intreat  the 
favor  of  the  Lord "  (R.  Y.).  We  have  therefore  no 
example  of  a  phrase  meaning  "  to  propitiate  God." 
Biblical  language  avoids  the  expression  of  the  idea 
that  God  is,  in  his  disposition  or  feeling,  averse  to 
forgiveness.  He  does  not  have  to  be  made  willing 
by  expiations  to  forgive  sin.  He  is,  and  always  has 
been,  willing.  The  Biblical  idea  is  that  the  obstacle 
to  forgiveness  lies  in  his  essential  righteousness  which 
so  conditions  his  grace  that  without  its  satisfac- 
tion God  cannot,  in  self-consistency,  forgive.  In  the 
heathen  view  expiation  renders  the  gods  willing  to 
forgive ;  in  the  Biblical  view  expiation  enables  God, 

1  The  Hebrew  is,  ni;n;  'iB-m  niSnS,  literally,  to  smooth 
or  stroke  the  face  of  Jehovah.  The  verb  is  frequently  used  of 
imploring  the  favor  of  men  (Job.  xi.  19 ;  Prov.  xix.  6). 


184  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

consistently  with  his  holiness,  actually  to  do  what  he 
was  never  unwilling  to  do.  In  the  former  view  sac- 
rifice changes  the  sentiment  of  the  gods  toward  men ; 
in  the  latter  it  affects  the  consistency  of  his  proced- 
ure in  relation  to  sin.  The  divine  character  is  in 
no  way  changed.  In  the  expiation  (which  God  him- 
self provides)  is  fulfilled  a  condition  of  the  operation 
of  that  grace  in  which  the  whole  work  of  salvation 
has  its  origin  and  ground.  In  heathenism  men  win 
the  favor  of  the  gods ;  in  Biblical  religion  God's 
favor  is  sovereign  and  free,  but  it  manifests  itself  in 
accord  with  the  whole  nature  of  God  ;  its  operation 
in  the  forgiveness  of  sin  is  conditioned  upon  the 
manifestation,  at  the  same  time,  of  the  divine  dis- 
pleasure at  sin  and  the  assertion  of  its  desert  of  pun- 
ishment. God  cannot  forgive  as  if  he  were  mere  good- 
nature. He  can  forgive  only  in  accordance  with  his 
changeless,  essential  righteousness,  which  must  be  vin- 
dicated and  satisfied.  To  effect  this  vindication  and 
satisfaction  is  the  function  of  sacrifice  or  expiation  in 
the  Bible. 

In  the  light  of  the  foregoing  considerations  there 
can  hardly  be  a  doubt  that  when  Christ  is  said  to  be 
an  IXaafio^  irepl  tmp  dfjuaprtcov  r^jMOiv  (I.  ii.  2  ;  iv.  10) 
the  meaning  is  that  he  accomplishes  for  us  a  recon- 
ciliation with  God  on  account  of  our  sins  by  himself 
atoning  for  them.  He  is  the  means  of  rendering  God 
favorable  in  so  far  as  by  his  sacrificial  death  he  has 
accomplished,  on  our  behalf,  the  ends  of  punishment, 
and  is  thus  in  respect  to  our  sins  a  means  of  reconcil- 
iation with  God. 


THE  WORK   OF   SALVATION  185 

It  is  frequently  asserted  that  in  John's  writings  we 
have  no  trace  of  an  ohjective  atonement  for  sin,  or  of 
those  legal  conceptions  of  God's  character  or  govern- 
ment which  are  the  presuppositions  of  the  sacrificial 
idea.^  It  is  true  tliat  John  has  not  developed  the 
idea  of  expiation  for  sin  by  the  suffering  and  death 
of  Christ,  but  it  is  none  the  less  true  that  he  several 
times  alludes  to  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  that  it 
was  an  underlying  assumption  of  his  teaching.  After 
making  the  fidlost  allowances  for  the  doubtful  pas- 
sages, there  remain  several  references  to  the  sacri- 
ficial idea  of  Christ's  work  which  no  unprejudiced 
exegesis  can  set  aside.  Such  are  the  description  of 
Jesus  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God"  (i.  29,  36)  ;  the  desig- 
nation of  him  as  our  Advocate,  in  respect  to  sin, 
before  the  Father  (I.  ii.  1) ;  the  statement  that  he 
died  for  (Jjirep)  men  (xi.  51  ;  xv.  13 ;  I.  iii.  16) ;  the 
allusion  to  the  necessity  of  his  death  (iii.  14),  and 
the  presentation  of  it  as  the  condition  of  founding 
his  kingdom  (xii.  32) ;  and  the  assertion  that  he  is 
the  propitiation  or  reconciliation  in  respect  to  the 
sins  of  the  world  (1.  ii.  2  ;  iv.  10).     To  these  may  be 

1  "We  have  not  been  able  to  discover  anywhere  in  the 
writings  of  the  apostle  John  any  trace  whatever  of  a  vicari- 
ous satisfaction,"  etc.  —  Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.  ii.  443  (orig. 
ii.  496). 

"  The  atonement  (according  to  John)  ...  is  the  believer  him- 
self brought  into  harmony  with  the  divine  mind,  purpose,  and 
will,  through  the  Mediator ;  and  it  involves  a  knowledge  of  the 
love  of  Christ,  and  its  exceeding  and  abounding  peace." — ■ 
Sears  :   The  Heart  of  Christ,  p.  501. 


186  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

added  the  reference  in  I.  ii.  12  to  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  "for  his  name's  sake"  (Sia  to  ovofia  avrov). 

We  have  seen  that  several  expressions  which  have 
been  thought  to  illustrate  the  sacrificial  conception  of 
Christ's  saving  work  are,  at  least,  of  doubtful  appli- 
cation to  it.  We  may  summarize  a  part  of  the  fore- 
going discussion  by  quoting  the  following  as  the 
principal  examples:  cleansing  from  sin  (I.  i.  7,  9), 
probably  refers,  not  to  satisfaction  for  the  guilt  of 
sin  by  atonement,  but  to  actual  deliverance  from  the 
power  and  defilement  of  the  sin  itself  ;  6  alpwv  (i.  29) 
probably  refers  to  the  taking  away  of  sin,  that  is, 
the  abolition  of  it,  and  not  to  the  penal  endurance  of 
its  guilt ;  the  giving  of  his  flesh,  etc.  (vi.  51),  is  probably 
a  symbolic  expression  for  Christ's  self-communica- 
tion to  the  believer,  rather  than  an  assertion  respect- 
ing his  sacrificial  death ;  I  incline  to  a  similar 
explanation  of  xvii.  19 :  "  For  their  sakes  I  sanctify 
myself;"  and  when  in  xii.  32  the  drawing  of  all 
men  to  Christ  is  conditioned  upon  his  being  lifted  up 
from  the  earth,  this  last  expression  seems  to  include 
not  only  his  death,  but  his  resurrection  and  ascension. 
In  that  case  the  passage  bears,  indeed,  upon  the 
saving  significance  of  Christ's  death,  but  less  directly 
and  exclusively  than  it  would  do  if  the  lifting  up 
referred  only  to  the  cross,  as  in  iii.  14  and  viii.  28. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  John  dwells  less  than  most 
of  the  New  Testament  Avriters  upon  the  legal  aspects 
of  the  divine  nature,  but  there  are  not  wanting  evi- 
dences that  the  conception  of  the  divine  love  which 


THE  WORK  OF   SALVATION  187 

underlies  all  his  religious  ideas  includes  the  notion 
of  righteousness,  that  self-respecting  attribute  of  God 
which  occasions  his  holy  displeasure  at  sin  and  re- 
quires to  be  expressed  and  vindicated  while  sin  is 
forgiven.  It  accords  with  John's  mystical  type  of 
mind  to  dwell  more  upon  the  union  of  the  believer 
with  Christ  than  upon  the  ground  of  forgiveness 
which  is  laid  by  Christ's  redemptive  work.  The 
apostle  is  fond  of  leaving  behind  "  the  first  principles 
of  Christ "  and  of  pressing  on  unto  "  perfection  '' 
(Heb.  vi.  1)  or  maturity.  He  is  less  concerned  with 
the  method  in  which  salvation  has  been  provided 
than  with  the  actual  realization  of  that  salvation  in 
its  fulness  of  blessedness  and  peace.  He  thinks  and 
speaks  less  of  the  provision  for  forgiveness  than  he 
does  of  the  life  of  fellowship  with  Christ  and  of  like- 
ness to  God  ;  in  a  word,  he  is  less  concerned  for 
theology  than  for  religion. 

John  wrote  after  the  great  conflicts  with  Judaism 
in  the  Church,  which  were  at  their  height  about  the 
middle  of  the  first  century,  had  ceased  to  stimulate 
and  shape  the  thought  of  Christian  teachers.  Except 
in  certain  allusions  in  the  First  Epistle,  his  writings 
(leaving  aside  for  our  purpose  the  Apocalypse)  are 
not  controversial.  He  undertook  to  interpret  to  his 
readers,  in  a  constructive  spirit,  the  gospel  of  Christ. 
He  wrote  after  many  years  of  Christian  experience 
and  reflection.  He  had  little  or  no  occasion  to  use 
the  weapons  of  a  distinctively  Jewish  logic,  or  to 
run  his  thoughts  into  Jewish  legal  forms.     He  did 


188  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

not,  it  would  seem,  feel  called  upon  to  argue  the  case 
for  the  various  doctrines  of  Clu'istianitj  at  all.  He 
simply  set  forth  characteristic  facts  of  Christ's  mani- 
festation as  they  had  taken  shape  in  his  memory, 
emphasized  the  essential  principles  of  his  teaching, 
and  pointed  out  the  bearing  of  tliese  principles  upon 
life.  Hence  we  do  not  find  subjects  analyzed  and  rea- 
soned out  by  John.  His  mode  of  thought  is  synthetic, 
and  the  particulars  of  a  subject  are  generally  touched 
only  by  suggestion.  It  need  not  surprise  us,  there- 
fore, that  we  find  no  developed  doctrine  of  redemp- 
tion in  John.  The  circumstances  of  the  case  explain 
why  few  Jewish  sacrificial  forms  of  thought  appear. 
All  that  we  should  expect  is  to  find  certain  sugges- 
tions and  allusions,  quite  incidentally  introduced, 
which  enable  us  to  judge  whether  or  not  John  as- 
sumed that  the  death  of  Christ  was  sacrificial  in  its 
significance  and  saving  in  its  effect.  We  have  al- 
ready indicated  the  answer  which  we  think  must  be 
given  to  this  question. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

THE   DOCTRINE   OP   THE    HOLY   SPIRIT 

Literature.  —  Weiss  :  DM.  TheoL,  The  Paraclete,  ii.  405- 
410;  Johann.  Lehrh.,  Der  Paraklet,  280-285;  Keuss  :  Hist. 
Christ.  TheoL,  Of  the  Spirit,  ii.  469-481  (orig.  524-538)  ;  Kost- 
lin:  Johann.  Lthrb.,  Gescliiift  des  Geistes,  u.  s.  w.,  196-209; 
Messner  :  Lehre  d.  Aposlel,  Der  Geist,  pp.  343-345;  Beyschlag  : 
Neutest.  TheoL,  Die  Heilswirksamkeit  des  erhohteu  Christus,  ii. 
444^46  ;  Bernard  :  The  Central  Teaching  of  Jesus  Christ  (.John 
xiii.-xvii. ),  joassJ/H  ;  Dods  :  The  Gospel  of  St.  John,  The  Spirit 
Chi-ist's  Witness,  ii.  205-225;  Ewald  :  Old  and  New  Test. 
TheoL,  The  Power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  pp.  324-340;  Baur  : 
Neutest.  TheoL,  Die  Mittheilung  des  Geistes,  pp.  384-380 ; 
Maurice  :  The  Gospel  of  St.  John,  The  Comforter  and  his  Test- 
imony, pp.  396-410  ;   Hare  :    The  Mission  of  the  Comforter. 

The  teaching  concerning  the  nature  and  office  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  found  chiefly  in  chapters  xiv.-xvi. 
of  the  Gospel.  This  teaching  is  the  leading  theme  of 
those  farewell  discourses  which  appear  to  have  been 
spoken  in  connection  with  the  last  supper.  It  was 
called  out  by  the  wonder  and  grief  of  the  disciples  at 
the  Lord's  approaching  departure.  Its  primar}^  object 
seems  to  have  been  to  assure  the  disciples  that,  al- 
though he  was  soon  to  be  no  more  with  them  in  visible 
form,  a  substitute  for  his  bodily  presence  would  be 
given  them  in  the  indwelling  Spirit.     The  work  of 


190  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

the  Spirit,  therefore,  is  the  final  subject  of  his  instruc- 
tion, and  stands  connected  with  the  completion  of  his 
own  mission. 

Let  us  first  pass  in  review  the  principal  designations 
of  the  Spirit,  from  which  we  shall  naturally  be  led  to 
consider  the  questions  concerning  his  personality  and 
work.  Besides  the  term  to  irvevfia^  or  to  Trvevixa  to 
ayiov,  the  Spirit  is  designated  as  6  •7rapdK\r]T0<i,  the 
Paraclete,  in  four  passages :  "  And  I  will  pray  the 
Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter 
(dXXov  TrapaKXrjTov),  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for- 
ever "  (xiv.  16)  ;  "  But  the  Comforter  (o  irapaKkrjTO'i), 
even  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  the  Father  will  send  in 
my  name,"  etc.  (xiv.  26)  ;  "  But  when  the  Comforter 
(6  7rapdK\r)T0'i)  is  come,  whom  I  will  send  unto  you 
from  the  Father,"  etc.  (xv.  26)  ;  "  If  I  go  not  away, 
the  Comforter  (6  TrapaKXrjTO^^  will  not  come  unto 
you,"  etc.  (xvi.  7). 

The  rendering  "  the  Comforter,"  for  6  TrapaKX-^Tot, 
dates  from  Wicklif's  translation,  and  has  been  per- 
petuated in  almost  all  later  English  Bibles,  including 
our  Revised  Version.  It  is  formed  from  the  Latin  con 
andfortis,  confortare,  and  means  one  who  strengthens. 
While  in  these  various  English  translations,  from  Wick- 
lif's onward,  irapaKX-qTo^  is  rendered  Comforter  in  the 
Gospel,  it  is  translated  Advocate  in  the  First  Epistle 
(ii.  1),  —  a  fact  which  is  probably  due  to  a  similar 
variation  in  the  rendering  in  several  ancient  versions. 
Although  the  word  "  Comforter  "  conveys  very  well 
the  practical  import  of  the  Spirit's  work,  it  cannot  be 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      191 

defended  as  an  accurate  translation  of  TrapciKXtjrof; . 
It  will  not  serve  as  a  rendering  in  I.  ii.  1,  where  Christ 
is  called  our  7rapdKXr]To<;  tt/oo?  tov  'rraripa ;  nor  does  it 
bring  out  the  passive  force  of  the  word  irapdKKr^TO'i . 
In  the  passage  just  referred  to  it  is  evident  that 
TrapciKXrjTO'i  means  advocate  or  intercessor.  Now 
since  in  xiv.  16  the  Holy  Spirit  is  designated  as  dWo<; 
7rapdKXr}To<i,  —  that  is,  since  the  Holy  Spirit  is  a  Para- 
clete as  really  as  Christ  is,  —  it  is  evident  that  some 
uniform  translation  of  TrapdKXrjTd  should  be  adopted. 
The  passage  applies  by  clear  implication  the  same 
designation  to  Christ  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  ap- 
plies it  in  the  same  sense.  The  word  should,  there- 
fore, be  rendered,  in  both  applications  of  it,  in  the 
same  way.  Furthermore,  the  word  7rapdK\r]T0<i  is 
passive  in  termination ;  it  means  one  who  is  called  in 
to  the  side  of  another,  and,  in  usage,  one  who  is  called 
to  counsel  or  help.  In  its  classic  use  it  is  applied  to 
an  advocate  in  a  case  at  law,  especially  to  the  advo- 
cate for  the  defence.^  From  these  considerations  it  is 
evident  that  the  term  is  best  translated  Advocate  or 
Helper  (margin,  R.  V.).  This  translation,  no  less  than 
the  other,  implies  the  positive,  active  work  of  the 
Spirit,  since  it  portrays  him  as  One  who  pleads  the 
Christian's  cause,  instructs  him  iu  the  truth  of  Christ, 
and  accuses  and  convicts  the  world  of  sin. 

Another  kindred  designation  for  the  Spirit  is  "  the 
Spirit  of  truth  "  {to  irvev/xa  ri]'?  d\7]deia^)  (xiv.  17  ;  xv. 

^  Cf.  the  Commentaries  of  Westcott  and  Lange,  on  John 
xiv.  16. 


192  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

26 ;  xvi.  13 ;  cf.  I.  iv.  6  ;  v.  7).  The  phrase  denotes 
the  Spirit  who  belongs  to  the  truth  in  such  a  sense 
that  he  is  its  possessor,  bearer,  and  mediator.  The 
passages  just  cited  set  its  meaning  in  clear  light.  As 
"  the  Spirit  of  truth  "  the  evil  world  does  not  receive 
or  know  him  (xiv.  17),  because  it  has  no  spiritual 
affinity  for  "  the  truth  "  which  Jesus  has  revealed,  and 
which  the  Spirit  seeks  to  make  effective  in  human 
life.  Again,  he  is  "  the  Spirit  of  truth  "  because  he 
bears  witness  of  Christ  to  the  disciples,  that  is,  inter- 
prets and  enforces  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and  fosters 
in  them  the  life  which  corresponds  to  it  (xv.  26). 
Even  more  explicitly  is  the  function  of  the  Spirit  of 
truth  defined  in  xvi.  13  sq.,  where  it  is  said  that  he 
shall  guide  the  disciples  "  into  all  the  truth  "  (et?  rr^v 
okrjOeLav  iraaav),  that  is,  into  the  knowledge  and  ex- 
perience of  that  specific  truth  which  Jesus  reveals  and 
embodies  in  his  own  person  {cf.  xiv,  6).  The  truth  as 
Jesus  proclaimed  and  illustrated  it,  the  truth  as 
matter  not  of  knowledge  only,  but  of  conduct  and  life 
(iii.  21 ;  II.  4),  is  the  sphere  of  the  Spirit's  work.  His 
work  is,  therefore,  set  in  the  closest  connection  with 
the  work  of  Christ  in  the  world,  since  in  unseen  but 
effective  ways  he  continues  to  interpret  and  apply  his 
truth,  and  to  make  men  feel  the  need  and  the  blessing 
of  its  possession. 

Of  the  two  terms  descriptive  of  the  Spirit  which  we 
have  reviewed,  the  former  is  more  general,  designating 
him  as  our  Helper,  but  not  describing  the  nature  or 
method  of  his  help ;  the  latter  is  more  specific,  and 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      193 

indicates  the  means  by  which  his  work  for  men  is 
accomplished.  "  Paraclete  "  is  a  legal  term,  and  the 
relations  which  it  implies  need  to  be  understood  in 
the  light  of  what  is  said  of  the  Spirit  of  truth  and  of 
the  relation  in  which  his  ministry  stands  to  the  work 
of  Christ.  But  before  entering  further  upon  this 
topic,  it  is  necessary  to  discuss  the  question  whether 
the  Spirit  in  John  designates  an  impersonal  principle 
or  a  distinct  personality. 

Many  scholars  have  called  in  question  the  current 
view  that  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  our  sources  is  meant 
a  self  distinct  from  Christ,  and  have  asserted  that 
under  this  term  we  must  understand  Christ  himself 
glorified  into  a  spirit,  or  the  spiritual  presence  and 
manifestation  of  Christ  to  his  disciples  after  his 
departure  from  earth.i  The  principal  exegetical  con- 
siderations which  are  urged  in  support  of  this  view 
are  the  following  :  In  close  connection  with  the  prom- 
ise of  the  Spirit's  coming,  and  as  apparently  identical 
with  it,  Jesus  mentions  his  own  coming  to  his  disci- 
ples, "  I  will  not  leave  you  desolate  (6p(f)avov<;) :  I 
come  to  you  "  (xiv.  18).  This  promise,  it  is  said, 
must  refer  to  his  own  spiritual  presence  with  his 
followers  to  the  end  of  time ;  "  it  follows  that  these 
are  not  two  distinct  and  different  manifestations,  but 
that  what  is  said  of  the  Paraclete  is  a  theological  for- 
mula by  which  the  idea  of  the  relation  between  Christ 
and  the  believer  is  analyzed  and  changed  into  a  hypos- 

^  So  Tholuck,  Commentary  on  John,  ad  loc.  xiv.  16 ;  Reuss, 
Hist.  Christ.  Theol.,  ii.  469  sq.  (orig.  ii.  524  sq.). 


194  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

tasis  "  (Reuss).  To  the  same  purport  is  the  assur- 
ance that  they  shall  soon  see  him  again  (xiv.  19  ;  xvi. 
16).  Moreover,  after  his  resurrection,  Jesus,  on  one 
occasion,  breathed  on  his  disciples  and  said :  Receive 
ye  the  Holy  Spirit  (xx.  22).  This,  it  is  said,  was  a 
symbolic  act  in  which  Jesus  conferred  on  them  a 
power  from  himself,  a  principle  of  spiritual  life  which 
was  derived  from  his  own  invisible  presence  with 
them.  The  Spirit  is  identical  with  himself.  Appeal 
is  also  made  to  I.  ii.  27,  28,  where  "the  anointing" 
(to  ■)(^pla-/xa^,  that  is,  the  bestowment  of  the  Spirit,  is 
closely  associated  with  Christ's  own  promised  manifest- 
ation. Before  discussing  the  bearing  of  these  pas- 
sages upon  our  subject,  let  us  review  the  exegetical 
arguments  which  are  presented  in  support  of  the  view 
that  the  Spirit  is  conceived  of  in  the  discourses  of  chap- 
ters xiv.-xvi.  as  a  personality  distinct  from  Christ. 

We  direct  attention,  first,  to  those  passages  in 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  expressly  distinguished 
from  Christ.  He  is  described  as  aXko^;  7rapdK\r}ro<i, 
"another  Advocate"  (xiv.  16).  Christ  was  an  Advo- 
cate ;  the  Holy  Spirit  will  be  another,  distinct  from 
Christ  and  supplying  his  place,  as  the  term  dWo^, 
which  designates  a  distinction  of  persons,  necessarily 
implies.  Again,  it  is  said  that  the  Father  will  send 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  Christ's  name,  and  that  he  will 
bring  to  the  remembrance  of  the  disciples  what  Christ 
has  taught  (xiv.  26).  Here  the  Spirit  is  clearly  dis- 
tinguished from  Christ.  Similarly  in  xv.  26  Jesus 
says  that  he  will  send  the  Paraclete  from  the  Father, 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      195 

and  adds  :  "  He  shall  bear  witness  of  me  "  (Trepl  if^ov). 
To  the  same  effect  is  the  repeated  assertion  that  the 
Spirit  shall  take  of  that  which  is  Christ's  —  that  is, 
his  truth — and  shall  declare  it  unto  the  disciples 
(xvi.  14,  15).  How  could  the  distinction  of  personal- 
ities be  more  clearly  marked  than  by  the  juxtaposition 
of  the  two  emphatic  pronouns  which  we  observe  in 
this  passage :  e'/ceti^o?  i/xe  ho^daei,  "  Me  shall  he  (the 
Spirit)  glorify  "  (xvi.  14).  Even  more  explicitly,  if 
possible,  does  Jesus  distinguish  the  Spirit  from  him- 
self in  the  words,  "  It  is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go 
away :  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Paraclete  will  not 
come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  go,  I  will  send  him  unto 
you"  (xvi.  7). 

Let  us  next  observe  the  use  of  pronouns  in  connec- 
tion with  the  passages  just  noticed.  Since  the  word 
irvevfjia  is  grammatically  neuter,  all  pronominal  desig- 
nations of  the  Spirit  which  have  irvev^a  for  their 
immediate  antecedent  must,  of  course,  be  neuter. 
These  words  obviously  have  no  bearing  upon  the 
question  of  the  personality  of  the  Spirit.^  That  which 
is  of  especial  importance  in  this  connection  is  that  as 
soon  as  "Trvevfia  ceases  to  be  the  immediate  antecedent 
of  pronouns  designating  the  Spirit,  masculine  forms 

1  The  neuter  relative  o,  which  occvu's  three  times  with  Ttvevfia 
for  its  antecedent  (xiv.  17,  2G  ;  xv.  26),  is  rendered  "whom  "  in 
both  our  versions  except  in  the  last  instance  (xv.  26),  where  it 
is  rendered  "  which,"  no  doubt  to  distinguish  it  from  the  imme- 
diately preceding  oV,  which  has  6  TrapdKkrjTos  for  its  antecedent. 
Similarly  is  avro  rendered  "him"  in  xiv.  17  where  it  occurs 
twice,  referring  to  wvfvfia. 


196  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

are  employed.  In  xiv.  26,  for  example,  we  read :  t6 
TTvevfjLa  TO  dytov  o  ireii^^ei  6  Trarrjp  iv  ra>  ovoixarC  fiov, 
€Keivo<i  vfia<i  Bthd^et,  Trdvra,  k.  t.  \.  The  force  of  the 
change  of  pronouns  may  be  exhibited  in  English  thus : 
"  the  Holy  Spirit  which  (o)  the  Father  will  send  in 
my  name,  he  (e/ceti^o?)  shall  teach  you  all  things,"  etc. 
The  same  usage  is  observed  in  xv.  26  :  to  Trvev/xa 
T?}?  a\T]6eia<i  o  irapa  rov  Trarpo'i  eKTropeverai,  iKelvo<; 
fxaprvp'qaeL  irepl  ifiov,  which  we  may  render  thus : 
"  the  Spirit  of  truth,  which  (5)  proceedeth  from  the 
Father,  he  (e/cet^o?)  shall  bear  witness  of  me."  It  is 
obvious  that,  in  John's  usage,  as  soon  as  the  necessity 
of  referring  to  the  Spirit  by  neuter  pronouns  which 
arises  from  the  immediate  antecedence  of  ro  Trvev/xa,  is 
removed,  he  instinctively  adopts  masculine  designa- 
tions. Accordingly  in  all  the  passages  where  the 
neuter  word  Trveu/jia  is  not  used,  we  find  the  masculine 
pronouns  avr6<;  and  €Keivo<i  employed  (xvi.  7,  8, 13, 14). 
In  the  first  of  these  passages  (xvi.  7,  8)  the  pronouns 
avTov  and  iKelvo<i  {ireixy^u)  avrov  Trpo?  vp,a<i.  /cal  eXdcov 
eKelvo<i  eXeyfet,  k.  t.  X.)  have,  indeed,  the  noun  irapd- 
K\r]To^  for  their  antecedent,  but  in  neither  of  the  other 
passages  is  the  form  of  the  pronoun  influenced  by  a 
masculine  antecedent,  and  in  one  of  them  (xvi.  13) 
cKelvo^  is  used  notwithstanding  the  apposition  to  it 
of  TO  TTvevfia  (otuv  Se  eXOy  e/ceti^o?,  to  Trvevfia  t?}? 
ak'qdeCa'i).  It  thus  appears  that  John,  when  not  pre- 
vented from  so  doing  by  the  grammatical  gender  of 
TTvevfia,  uniformly  designates  the  Spirit  by  masculine 
pronouns  implying  personality. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      197 

What,  now,  does  John  predicate  of  the  Spirit  to 
whom  he  thus  refers  in  personal  terms  ?  To  the 
Spirit  is  ascribed  speaking  (XaX-qaei^  xvi.  13),  teacli- 
ing  (^BiSd^eL,  xiv.  26),  the  announcing  of  future  events 
and  the  proclamation  of  the  truth  of  Christ  {avay- 
jeXei,  xvi.  13,  14),  the  guiding  of  the  disciples  into  all 
the  truth  (of  Christ)  (^oSrjyricret  v/xa<i  eh  rrjv  aXrjOetav 
irdcrav,  xvi.  13),  the  bringing  of  the  teachings  of 
Jesus  to  the  recollection  of  the  disciples  (vTro^ivriaet^ 
K.  T.  X.,  xiv.  26),  the  glorification  of  Christ  {eKelvo^ 
i/xe  Bo^daec,  xvi.  14),  the  bearing  of  testimony  con- 
cerning Christ  (/Jbaprvp-qcret  irepl  i/xov,  xv.  26)  which  is 
likened,  by  implication,  to  the  testimony  which  his 
disciples  bear  concerning  him  (xv.  27),  and  the  con- 
viction of  the  world  concerning  sin,  righteousness,  and 
judgment  (^iXey^ei,  k.  t.  A..,  xvi.  8).  To  this  series  of 
personal  actions  which  are  ascribed  to  the  Spirit  may 
be  added  the  references  to  his  always  being  in  fellow- 
ship with  the  disciples  (iW  17  /Ji,e6'  vfXMv  etV  top  alcova^ 
xiv.  16),  and  to  his  abiding  at  their  side  for  succor 
(jrap'  viiiv  yweVet),  and  within  them  {koI  iv  vfiiv  icrriv 
xiv.  17)  as  a  power  and  inspiration.  We  summarize, 
then,  the  considerations  which  have  been  adduced  in 
proof  of  the  personality  of  the  Spirit :  (1)  the  Spirit 
is  expressly  distinguished  from  Christ ;  (2)  he  is  de- 
scribed by  personal  designations;  and  (3)  to  him  is 
ascribed  a  series  of  personal  activities.  We  regard 
these  considerations  as  decisive  upon  the  point  now 
at  issue.  Even  Reuss  admits  that  exegesis  alone  sus- 
tains this  conclusion.     He  thinks  it  inconsistent  with 


198  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

"practical  logic,"  and  therefore  deems  it  necessary 
to  seek  some  explanation  of  the  way  in  which  John 
was  led  into  this  inconsistency.  He  declares  that 
"  the  solution  of  the  problem  (as  to  the  personality 
of  the  Spirit)  does  not  belong  to  exegesis."  ^  As  we 
are  here  concerned  primaril}^  with  the  exegesis  of  the 
text,  while  Reuss  is  chiefly  concerned  with  an  effort 
to  explain  the  alleged  misconceptions  which  the  text 
presents,  we  may  decline  to  follow  this  author  on  his 
a  priori  road.  He  finds,  however,  in  the  text  itself, 
as  we  indicated  on  an  earlier  page  (p.  193),  traces  of 
the  true,  rational  idea  that  the  Spirit  is  "a  power,  a 
manifestation,  a  quality."  There  are  thus,  in  his 
view,  two  inconsistent  representations  respecting  the 
nature  of  the  Spirit.  One  of  these  accords  with  prac- 
tical logic ;  the  other  is  a  speculative  idea  whose 
motive  is  to  be  accounted  for.  Let  us  turn  again  to 
the  principal  passages  which  present,  in  the  judgment 
of  Reuss,  the  tenable  view  that  the  Spirit  is  an  im- 
personal force,  and  test  their  alleged  inconsistency 
with  those  which  so  clearly  describe  the  Spirit  as 
personal. 

We  think  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  passages 
which  presuppose  the  distinct  personality  of  the  Spirit 
are  much  more  explicit  than  those  which  have  been 
supposed  to  imply  the  opposite  idea.  We  might 
therefore  justly  appeal  to  these  clearer  and  more 
numerous  passages  as  furnishing  the  norm  for  the 
interpretation  of   those  which    are  more  vague  and 

1  Hist.  Christ.  TheoL,  ii.  472  (orig.  ii.  527). 


THE   DOCTRINE  OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      199 

indefinite.  Let  us,  however,  review  the  latter  set  of 
passages,  and  see  what  is  the  nature  of  the  alleged 
inconsistency  between  them  and  those  which  we  have 
just  examined.  One  of  the  most  important  of  these 
is  xiv.  18,  19 :  "I  will  not  leave  you  desolate :  I 
come  unto  you.  Yet  a  little  while,  and  the  world  be- 
holdeth  me  no  more  ;  but  ye  behold  me,"  etc.  Inter- 
preters are  divided  on  the  question,  To  what  event 
do  the  co7ning  and  beholding  here  spoken  of  refer  ? 
Some  (as  Augustine  and  Hofmann)  suppose  that  the  f^^tAwu^ 
parousia  is  meant ;  others  (as  Weiss  and  Holtzmann) 
find  here  a  reference  to  the  appearance  of  Jesus  after  /^^-**-^^ 
the  resurrection.  On  neither  of  these  views  can  the 
passage  come  into  any  possible  conflict  with  those 
which  describe  the  personality  of  the  Spirit,  since  no 
reference  to  the  Spirit  is  made.  The  more  common 
and,  I  think,  the  preferable  view,  however,  is  that  « 
the  coming  spoken  of  is  the  coming  of  Christ  to  his  j^^ 
disciples  through  the  Spirit,  and  that  the  beholding 
is  the  spiritual  vision  of  Christ  which  is  involved  in 
their  communion  with  him  through  the  operation  of 
the  Spirit  (so  Liicke,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  Godet,  Plum- 
mer).  Many  interpreters  have  attempted  a  combina- 
tion of  these  last  two  views  (as  DeWette,  Lange, 
Ebrard,  Westcott),  —  an  effort  which  leads,  I  think, 
to  no  clear  and  satisfactory  result. 

Assuming,  then,  the  correctness  of  the  third  inter- 
pretation, does  it  involve  any  inconsistency  between 
this  passage  and  the  idea  of  the  personality  of  the 
Spirit  ?     Since  the  Spirit  comes,  as  we  have  seen,  as 


200  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

the  continuator  of  Christ's  work  in  the  world,  and 
has  it  for  his  mission  to  interpret  and  apply  Christ's 
truth  and  to  quicken  and  foster  in  men  the  life  which 
corresponds  to  that  truth,  Christ  himself  may  fitly  be 
said  to  come  to  his  disciples,  only  in  another  form 
of  manifestation,  in  the  coming  of  the  Spirit.  His 
promise  to  come  to  them  (in  the  Spirit)  is  made  in 
contrast  to  the  idea  entertained  by  them  that,  in  with- 
drawing his  bodily  presence,  he  might  abandon  them 
altogether.  In  saying:  "  I  come  unto  you"  the  em- 
phasis does  not  lie  upon  the  strict  identity  in  respect 
to  the  form  of  manifestation  of  the  "  I "  who  is  com- 
ing and  the  "  I "  who  is  speaking,  but,  as  the  paral- 
lelism shows,  upon  the  certainty  that  they  will  not  be 
deserted  by  him  when  he  withdraws  from  their  sight. 
"  I  come  to  you "  is  the  positive  equivalent  of  the 
negative :  "  I  will  not  leave  you  desolate."  The  em- 
phasis lies,  therefore,  upon  the  certainty  that  he  will 
be  with  them  still,  and  not  upon  any  assertion  that  he 
will  be  with  them  in  the  same  manner  or  form  as  he 
has  been.  It  is  only  by  a  misplaced  emphasis  that 
the  passage  can  be  made  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of 
a  distinction  between  Christ  and  the  Spirit.  The 
same  remarks,  substantially,  apply  to  xvi.  16 :  "A 
little  while,  and  ye  behold  me  no  more ;  and  again  a 
little  while  and  ye  shall  see  me,"  and  to  xvi.  22 : 
"  But  I  will  see  you  again,  and  your  heart  shall 
rejoice,"  etc.,  provided  they  be  interpreted  as  refer- 
ring to  the  mission  of  the  Paraclete.     The  interpre- 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      201 

tation  of  xiv.  18  is,  of  course,  determining  for  these 
verses.^ 

Whatever  view  be  taken  of  the  meaning  in  detail 
of  the  passage  which  describes  Jesus  as  breathing  on 
his  disciples  and  saying,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Spirit "  (xx.  22),  and  of  its  relation  to  the  scene  at  Pen- 
tecost, it  furnishes  no  just  objection  to  the  view  that 
between  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  a  distinction  is 
implied.  Even  if,  as  Reuss  supposes,^  the  scene  pre- 
sents a  parallel  to  the  narrative  in  Genesis  (ii.  7) 
which  describes  Jehovah  as  breathing  into  the  nos- 
trils of  man  the  breath  of  life,  it  would  by  no  means 
necessarily  follow  that  the  Holy  Spirit  designates  here 
Christ's  own  spirit,  subjectively  considered,  and  is 
undistinguishable  from  his  own  person.  If  the  dis' 
tinction  is  well  founded  upon  other  clear  passages,  it  is 
applicable  here  without  violence  to  the  passage. 

1  There  is  almost  as  much  variation  of  oiDinion  respecting 
the  coming  referred  to  in  xiv.  3,  "  I  come  again,  and  will  re- 
ceive you  unto  myself,"  as  in  respect  to  the  coming  spoken  of  in 
the  later  verses  which  we  have  just  reviewed.  Some  refer  it  to 
his  spiritual  personal  presence  (De  Wette,  Scholten,  Keim)  ; 
some  to  the  coming  of  the  Paraclete  (Liicke,  Olshausen, 
Neander,  Godet)  ;  others  to  the  coming  of  Christ  at  the  death 
of  his  disciples  (Reuss,  Tholuck,  Lange,  Holtzmann)  ;  and  still 
others  to  the  personal  second  advent  of  Christ  (Frommann, 
Hofmann,  Lechler,  Meyer,  Weiss).  This  last  interpretation 
harmonizes  best  with  the  immediate  context,  which  speaks  of 
Christ's  going  away  to  prepare  a  place  for  his  disciples,  and  of 
his  taking  them  unto  himself  at  his  coming;  only  upon  the 
second  of  the  views  above  mentioned  could  the  passage  have 
any  direct  bearing  upon  oxir  subject. 

2  Hist.  Christ.  T/ieoL,  ii.  480  (orig.  ii.  537). 


202  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Concerning  the  last  of  the  passages  which  we  shall 
examine  in  this  connection  (I.  ii,  27,  28)  Reuss  says : 
"  See,  again,  the  passage  which  says  distinctly  :  '  The 
anointing  which  ye  received '  (that  is  to  say,  the 
Spirit,  or  the  Paraclete)  '  teacheth  you  concerning  all 
things.  And  now  abide  in  him,  that  if  he  shall  be 
be  manifested,  we  may  have  boldness,  and  not  be 
ashamed  before  him  at  his  coming.'  Evidently  here, 
he  whose  coming  was  expected  and  the  Paraclete  are 
one  and  the  same  person.  If  this  be  so,  it  is  natural 
that  the  action  of  the  Paraclete  should  be  represented 
sometimes  as  personal,  sometimes  as  impersonal ;  and 
in  the  former  case,  sometimes  as  distinct  from  that  of 
Christ,  sometimes  as  one  with  it."  ^  This  does  not 
seem  to  me  to  be  an  accurate  statement.  In  the 
first  place,  the  abbreviation  of  the  passage  by 
Reuss  brings  the  idea  of  the  anointing  and  that  of 
Christ's  appearing  into  closer  proximity  than  that  in 
which  they  actually  stand  in  the  passage.  Again,  in 
the  context  of  our  passage  the  "  anointing  "  is  clearly 
distinguished  from  Christ  from  whom  it  comes  :  "  And 
ye  have  an  anointing  {')(^pl<j fia)  from  the  Holy  One  " 
(airo  Tov  dyiov),  (I.  ii.  20),  provided,  as  seems  almost 
certain,  "  the  Holy  One  "  be  understood  to  refer  to 
Christ.  (So  Rothe,  Haupt,  Huther,  Westcott,  Plum- 
mer  and  Holtzmann,  vs.  Neander  and  Weiss,  who 
refer  the  words  to  God.)  The  language  of  the  verses 
in  question  is  in  no  respect  unfavorable  to  the  same 
distinction.  It  is  true  that  the  anointing,  the  gift  or 
1  Op.  cit.  ii.  479,  480  (orig.  ii.  536,  537). 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT       203 

grace  of  the  Spirit,  is  closely  associated  in  idea  with 
abiding  in  Christ,  and  with  preparedness  for  his 
parousia,  but  it  is  also  to  be  noticed  that  the  chrism 
is  said  to  have  been  received  from  Christ,  and  is  not 
identified  with  him.  There  is  throughout  the  pas- 
sage, as  so  commonly  in  the  Epistle  (cf.,  e.  g.,  iii.  2,  3), 
a  use  of  pronouns  which  is  grammatically  ambiguous, 
and  an  abrupt  transition  from  one  subject  to  another, 
but  there  is  no  confusion  of  the  Spirit  with  Christ, 
Even  if  to  xpicr/xa  (personified)  be  regarded  as  the 
subject  of  iSiSa^ev,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
following  eV  avrw  refers  to  Christ,  and  that  he  is  the 
subject  of  all  that  is  said  in  the  following  verse  (28). 
We  conclude  that  the  close  association  of  the  gift  and 
work  of  the  Spirit  with  the  ideas  of  abiding  in  Christ 
and  of  readiness  for  Christ's  coming,  can  give  no 
ground  whatever  for  denying  or  doubting  the  distinc- 
tion between  Christ  and  the  Spirit  which  is  elsewhere 
so  explicitly  affirmed.  Reuss,  indeed,  candidly  admits 
that  "  literal  exegesis  pleads  for  the  distinction  of  per- 
sons," and  that  "  speculative  reason  admits  and  sanc- 
tions it; but  (he  adds)  practical  logic  demurs."^  We 
are  here  concerned  with  exegesis,  and  it  is  no  pre- 
sumption to  maintain  that  the  results  of  exegesis 
must  be  abandoned,  and  an  a  priori  method  of  dealing 
with  the  subject  must  be  adopted  by  him  who  would 
call  in  question  the  personality  of  the  Spirit. 

Let  us  now  turn  from  the  question  of  the  nature  to 
that  of  the  mission  and  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     For 

1  Op.  cit.  ii.  478  (orig.  ii.  534). 


204  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

this  purpose  we  must  review  several  of  the  passages 
already  examined,  but  from  a  different  point  of  view. 
Three  points  require  to  be  considered :  (1)  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Spirit  to  the  historical  work  of  Christ; 
(2)  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  believers ;  and  (3)  his 
work  in  the  unbelieving  world. 
(j\  Under  the  first  head  we  notice  that  God  sends  the 
Spirit  in  Christ's  name  (iv  tw  ovo/xari  fiov,  xiv.  26). 
The  force  of  the  expression  will  be  appreciated  by  recall- 
ing the  significance  of  the  "  name  "  in  the  Hebrew  mode 
of  thought.  The  name  is  the  symbol  of  the  nature, 
essence,  and  import  of  the  thing  or  person  which  it 
represents.  The  name  of  Christ,  therefore,  stands 
for  that  which  Christ  is;  it  is  the  symbol  of  his  saving 
life  and  power.  When,  then,  the  Spirit  is  said  to  be 
sent  in  Christ's  name,  the  meaning  is  that  the  sphere 
of  the  Spirit's  working  is  the  same  as  that  of  Christ ; 
that  the  mission  of  the  Spirit  is  a  part  of  the  redemp- 
tive economy  in  which  lie  the  whole  purpose  and 
meaning  of  Christ's  work.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  is 
therefore  inseparably  linked  to  God's  historic  ac- 
tion in  the  redemption  of  mankind  through  Christ. 
"  Christ's  'name  '  —  all,  that  is,  which  can  be  defined 
as  to  his  nature  and  his  work  —  is  the  sphere  in  which 
the  Spirit  acts  ;  and  so  little  by  little  through  the  long 
life  of  the  Church  the  meaning  of  the  primitive  con- 
fession 'Jesus  is  Lord'  (Rom.  x.  9 ;  1  Cor.  xii.  3) 
is  made  more  fully  known."  ^  "  God  sends  the  Spirit 
in  the  name  of  Jesus,  that  is,  so  tliat  what  the  name 

1  Westcott,  Commentary,  in  loco. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      205 

of  Christ  comprises  in  itself  forms  the  sphere  in 
which  the  divine  thought,  counsel,  and  will  lives." 
It  is  "  this  name  the  complete  saving  knowledge  of 
which,  its  confession,  influence,  glorification,  etc.,  is 
to  be  brought  about  and  advanced  through  the  mission 
of  the  Spirit,  as,  in  general,  all  that  God  has  done  in 
the  carrying  out  of  his  redemptive  counsel  he  has 
done  eV  Xpia-TM  (Eph.  i.  3  sq.).''  ^ 

Of  kindred  significance  are  the  assertions  that  the 
Spirit  shall  bring  to  the  remembrance  of  believers  all 
that  Jesus  had  said  to  them  (xiv.  26),  that  he  shall 
bear  witness  of  the  Saviour  (xv.  26),  guide  the  dis- 
ciples into  all  the  truth  (xvi.  13)  and  glorify  Christ  by 
taking  of  his  and  declaring  it  unto  them  (xvi.  14,  15). 
The  operation  of  the  Spirit  is  wholly  in  the  line  of 
Christ's  work  on  earth ;  it  belongs  to  the  same  sphere, 
and  contemplates  the  same  ends.  It  represents  a 
stage  of  the  redemptive  process  which  lies  beyond  the 
historic  work  of  Christ ;  it  is  the  continued  operation 
of  God's  saving,  redeeming  love,  interpreting,  apply- 
ing, and  perfecting  the  work  of  the  Saviour.  The 
Spirit's  work  is  the  invisible  operation  of  those  forces 
and  influences  of  divine  grace  which  were  revealed  in 
visible  manifestation  in  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus.  This 
work,  therefore,  represents  a  carrying  forward  and 
completion  of  God's  redemptive  purpose.  Hence  the 
historic  action  of  God  in  the  work  of  Christ  on  earth 
must  come  to  its  close  and  find  its  fulfilment  in  this 
final  stage  of  the  great  saving  process.  Such  seems 
1  Meyer,  Commentary/,  in  loco. 


206  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

to  be  the  import  of  the  Saviour's  words :  "  It  is  ex- 
pedient for  you  that  I  go  away :  for  if  I  go  not  away, 
the  Paraclete  will  not  come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  go,  I 
will  send  him  unto  you"  (xvi.  7). 

The  same  general  conception  of  the  Spirit's  relation 
to  the  work  of  Jesus  which  meets  us  in  these  dis- 
courses, is  found  in  the  First  Epistle.  In  contrast  to 
the  "  antichrists "  (ii.  18)  who  deny  the  Messiahship 
and  incarnation  of  Jesus,  and  who  have  gone  forth  out 
of  the  Church,  the  true  and  faithful  Christians  are 
said  to  "  have  an  anointing  from  the  Holy  One  "  and 
to  "  know  all  things  "  (ii.  20).  The  "  all  things  "  of 
this  verse  is  synonymous  with  "  the  truth "  which 
they  are  said  in  the  next  verse  (21)  to  know,  and  with 
"  all  the  truth  "  (xvi.  13),  into  which  Jesus  had  said 
that  the  Spirit  should  guide  the  disciples.  "  The 
truth"  is  the  specific  truth  which  he  came  to  pro- 
claim and  to  embody  in  his  own  person.  He  not  only 
declares  the  truth,  but  he  is  the  truth  (xiv.  6).  The 
truth  is  the  true  life  of  fellowship  with  God  and  of 
likeness  to  him.  Of  this  life  Jesus  presents  the  per- 
fect type.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  is  to  teach  men  all 
things  that  pertain  to  that  life,  and  to  lead  them  on  in  a 
more  and  more  perfect  experience  and  realization  of 
it.  Since  the  Spirit  thus  continues  and  completes  the 
work  of  Christ,  it  is  natural  that  the  operation  of  the 
Spirit  should  be  in  the  closest  manner  associated  with 
abiding  in  Christ :  "  The  anointing  which  ye  received 
of  him  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  need  not  that  any  one 
teach  you ;    but  as  his  anointing  teacheth  you  con- 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      207 

cerning  all  things,  and  is  true,  and  is  no  lie,  and  even 
as  it  taught  you,  ye  abide  in  him  "  (I.  ii.  27). 

These  passages  which  connect  the  Spirit's  workllj 
with  that  of  Christ  involve  to  some  extent  the  second 
topic  to  be  considered,  —  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in 
believers.  This  work  is  to  foster  the  Christian  life 
in  those  who  receive  Christ,  The  principal  terms 
in  which  it  is  defined  are  teaching  (xiv.  26  ;  I.  ii.  27), 
guiding  into  all  the  truth  (xvi.  13),  and  hearing  witness 
of  Christ  (XV.  26;  I.  v.  7).  The  faith  of  the  first 
believers  was  largely  due  to  the  visible  presence  of 
Jesus  with  them.  Because  they  saw  and  heard  him 
and  witnessed  his  miracles,  they  were  led  to  trust  in 
him.  It  was  the  purpose  of  Jesus  that  men  should 
be  brought  more  and  more  to  ground  their  faith,  not 
upon  signs  or  miracles  or  the  impression  made  by  his 
visible  presence,  but  upon  that  which  he  taught  and 
was.  Those  who  believed  on  him  because  they  beheld 
the  signs  which  he  did,  Jesus  himself  did  not  confi- 
dently trust  (ii.  23-25).  It  was  necessary  that  the 
faith  of  men  be  founded  upon  deeper  and  more  endur- 
ing reasons.  Only  the  experience  of  the  joy  and  rich- 
ness of  the  new  spiritual  life,  only  the  certainty 
which  the  living  fellowship  with  God  imparts,  can 
supply  an  immovable  foundation  for  faith.  Hence 
Jesus  said  to  Thomas :  "  Because  thou  hast  seen  me 
thou  hast  believed :  blessed  are  they  that  have  not 
seen,  and  yet  have  believed  "  (xx.  29). 

We  are  to  read  the  statements  concerning  the  work 
of  the  Spirit  in  the  light  of  these   ideas.      Certain 


208  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

.defects  in  the  faith  of  the  disciples  were  connected 
with  their  inborn  prejudices  and  misunderstandings, 
and  even  with  their  attachment  to  his  own  person. 
Faith  must  become  larger,  deeper,  more  spiritual. 
It  must  rest  upon  more  adequate  grounds.  It  must 
be  fortified  by  richer  experience.  It  must  penetrate 
beneath  the  surface  of  Christ's  person,  to  his  very 
heart,  and  must  draw  its  life  from  his  own  inmost, 
divine  life.  This  could  only  happen  by  his  departing 
from  them.  For  this  reason,  he  said,  his  departure 
was  expedient,  for  if  he  went  not  away  the  Paraclete 
would  not  come  to  them  (xvi.  7).  He  seems  to  mean 
that  while  he  is  present  with  them,  a  veil  of  sense 
hangs  before  their  eyes  and  prevents  them  from  seeing 
the  deepest  things  of  his  gospel.  ^  Only  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  can  they  live  their  way  into  an 
appreciation  of  these.  Under  this  guidance  his  truth 
shall  open  to  them  its  hidden  depths ;  it  shall  disclose 
its  inner  meanings  ;  it  shall  assert  in  their  lives  its 
inherent  power.  Their  traditional  prejudices  shall 
gradually  give  way ;  their  failures  to  comprehend  his 
mission  and  to  learn  the  nature  of  his  kingdom  shall 
be  overcome ;  they  shall  cease  to  know  Christ  after 
the  flesh.  The  narrow  limitations  which  their  Jewish 
training  led  them  to  set  to  his  work  shall  be  broken 

1  "  So  long  as  he  continued  with  them,  they  lived  by  sight, 
rather  than  by  faith ;  and  sight  disturbs  faith,  and  shakes  it, 
and  weakens  it.  Sight,  as  belonging  to  the  world  of  sense,  par- 
takes its  frailties  and  imperfections.  To  put  forth  all  its  power, 
faith  must  be  purely  and  wholly  faith."  —  Hare  :  The  Mission 
of  the  Comforter,  p.  140. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT       209 

down  and  the  world-wide  significance  of  his  mission 
and  kingdom  shall  appear. 

The  whole  history  of  the  apostolic  age  is  an  illus- 
tration and  fulfilment  of  the  promise  of  Jesus  con- 
cerning the  work  of  the  Spirit.  The  slow  but  certain 
process  by  which  his  truth  and  kingdom  burst  the 
bonds  of  Jewish  particularism  and  asserted  their 
universal  significance  and  destination ;  the  gradual 
enlightenment  of  the  minds  of  the  apostles  whereby 
they  were  led  to  see  that  God  is  no  respecter  of  per- 
sons ;  the  providential  opening  of  the  door  of  faith  to 
the  Gentiles  ;  and  the  matchless  missionary  career  of 
that  champion  of  a  universal  gospel,  the  apostle  Paul, 
—  are  proofs  of  the  Spirit's  presence  and  power  in 
guiding  the  disciples  into  all  Christ's  truth  and  in 
revealing  to  them  its  true  import  for  themselves 
and  for  the  world. 

No  less  marked  was  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  deep- 
ening the  personal  lives  of  those  men.  How  many 
illustrations  do  the  gospels  give  us  of  the  utter  failure 
and  inability  of  the  first  disciples  to  understand  their 
Master's  words.  "  Are  ye  so  without  understanding 
also?"  (Mark  vii.  18)  was  his  sorrowful  rejoinder  to 
them  when  they  asked  the  meaning  of  one  of  his 
plainest  lessons.  When  he  portrayed  the  nature  of 
his  kingship  John  tells  us  that  his  disciples  did  not 
understand  his  meaning  (xii.  16),  and  he  himself 
asserted  that  he  had  many  things  to  tell  them  which 
as  yet  they  could  not  bear  (xvi.  12).  The  author  of 
the  writings   which    we  are  studying   is   a    striking 

14 


210  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

illustration  of  the  Spirit's  influence  in  deepening  the 
first  disciples'  understanding  of  the  person  and  truth 
of  Jesus.  Like  the  others  he  at  first  looked  for  an 
earthly  kingdom,  to  be  founded  and  extended  by  force 
(Luke  ix.  54)  ;  his  views  of  the  aim  of  the  gospel 
were  as  inadequate  as  those  of  his  associates ;  his 
appreciation  of  his  Master's  spiritual  truth  was  as 
defective.  Yet  it  was  he  who  gave  us  that  interpre- 
tation of  the  gospel  which  has  been  aptly  called  "  the 
heart  of  Christ."  No  other  mind  has  risen  to  con- 
ceptions so  broad,  so  lofty,  and  so  purely  spiritual 
concerning  the  great  themes  of  religion.  His  con- 
ception of  God's  nature  is  the  sublimest  which  the 
New  Testament  anywhere  presents ;  his  insight  into 
the  depths  of  Jesus'  person  and  teaching  is  the  pro- 
foundest ;  and  to  his  thought  the  gospel  is  as  wide 
and  all-embracing  as  the  needs  of  man  and  as  the 
love  of  God  which  gave  it  birth.  It  is  utter  folly  to 
j  attempt  to  explain  the  matchless  splendor  of  these 
I  conceptions  apart  from  the  working  of  that  promised 
I  Spirit  which  unsealed  the  heavenly  secrets  of  Christ 

to  the  mind  of  his  beloved  disciple.^ 
M)  Our  third  and  final  topic  is  the  relation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  the  unbelieving  world.     This  relation  is  most 
fully  set  forth  in  xvi.  8-11 :  "  And  he  (the  Paraclete), 
when  he  is  come,  will  convict  the  world  in  respect  of 

1  Fitly,  therefore,  did  the  mediaeval  church,  in  its  effort  to 
express  this  heavenward  flight  of  the  apostle's  spirit,  adopt  as 
his  symbol  the  eagle  soaring  against  the  sun.  This  conception 
finds  expression  in  the  noble  hymn,  commonly  attributed  to 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY  SPIRIT      211 

sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment :  of  sin, 
because  they  believe  not  on  me ;  of  righteousness, 
because  I  go  to  the  Father,  and  ye  behold  me  no 
more ;  of  judgment,  because  the  prince  of  this  world 
hath  been  judged."  Several  particular  points  con- 
nected with  the  passage  require  brief  mention  before 
its  import  as  a  whole  is  considered.  The  word  iXey^ec 
should  be  rendered  will  convince  or  convict  (R.  V.), 
instead  of  tvill  reprove  (A.  V.),  which  is  too  weak  a 
translation.  The  term  is  a  legal  one.  The  Spirit  is 
represented  as  having  a  controversy,  so  to  speak,  with 
the  world  respecting  sin,  righteousness,  and  judgment ; 
and  the  Spirit  asserts  and  maintains  his  true  view 
as  against  the  world's  false  view.  The  Spirit  sets 
the  world  clearly  in  the  wrong,  that  is,  convinces  it 
in  respect  to  the  matters  of  difference,  and  pronounces 
the  world's  guilt  in  consequence,  that  is,  convicts  it. 
Both  the  ideas  of  convincing  and  cofivicting  are,  no 
doubt,  involved  in  iXey^et,  but  I  am  of  opinion  that 
the  condemnatory  idea  expressed  by  convict  is  rather 
secondary  than  primary,  and  that  ivill  convince  is  the 
best  available  English  translation. 

The   rendering   of  the  preposition   irept   by  "  of " 

Adam  of  St.  Victor,  a  stanza  of  which  we  here  quote  in  the 
original  and  in  Dr.  Washburn's  translation :  — 

Volat  avis  sina  meta  Bird  of  God !  with  boundless  flight 

Quo  uec  vates  nee  propheta  Soaring  far  beyond  the  height 

Evolavit  altius ;  Of  the  bard  or  prophet  old ; 

Tam  implenda,  tarn  impleta,  Truth  fulfilled,  and  truth  to  be,  — 

Nunquam  vidit  tot  secreta  Never  purer  mystery 

Purus  homo  purius.  Did  a  purer  tongue  unfold. 


212  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

in  the  A.  V.  did  much  to  obscure  the  sense  of  the 
passage.  The  meaning  is  not  merely  that  the  Spirit 
will,  in  general,  convince  the  world  of  its  sin,  of  the 
true  righteousness,  etc.,  but  that  in  respect  to  the 
matter  of  sin,  etc.,  the  Spirit  will  work  a  certain  spe- 
cial conviction  by  certain  special  means.  The  ore 
clauses  of  verses  9-11  explain  the  special  manner  or 
means  of  the  convincing  in  respect  to  sin,  righteous- 
ness, and  judgment.  Some  interpreters  assign  to  ore  in 
these  clauses  a  simple  causal  meaning,  and  connect 
them  with  the  verb  iXey^et,  and  thus  the  sense  would 
be  (to  take  one  example)  :  He  will  convince  the 
world  concerning  sin  because  of  its  unbelief.  Others 
make  ort  mean  so  far  as,  and  treat  the  otl  clauses 
as  more  exact  definitions  of  the  preceding  nouns 
(a^iapria^,  k.  t.  X.)  ;  for  example  :  He  will  convince 
the  world  concerning  sin  in  so  far  as  they  do  not 
believe  on  me.  The  former  is  simpler  and  more  nat- 
ural, and  I  shall  proceed  upon  that  view  of  their  force. 
While  there  are  scarcely  any  generic  differences 
among  critical  interpreters  in  regard  to  the  meaning 
of  this  passage,  there  are  considerable  variations  in 
respect  to  emphasis  and  to  the  scope  of  its  terms. 
Speaking  very  generally  we  may  say  that  there  is  a 
narrower,  and  a  broader  view  of  its  meaning.  The 
narrower  view  holds  the  terms  of  the  passage  in  close 
relation  to  the  person  of  Jesus.  It  is  the  specific 
sin  of  rejecting  him  of  which  the  Spirit  convinces 
the  world  ;  it  is  his  personal  righteousness  which  the 
Spirit  vindicates  ;  it  is  as  the  enemy  of  his  work  and 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      213 

kingdom  that  the  Spirit  proves  Satan  to  liave  been 
judged.  This  mode  of  treating  the  passage,  which 
limits  the  terms  more  closely,  is  illustrated  in  the 
comments  of  Meyer  and  Weiss.  This  view  of  the 
passage  is  certainly  just  as  against  those  loose  and 
vague  interpretations  which  explain  "  sin,"  "  right- 
eousness" and  "judgment"  almost  without  reference 
to  the  special  explanatory  statements  of  verses  9-11. 
The  older  theologians,  for  example,  explained  "  sin  " 
as  sin  in  general  as  a  condition  of  condemnation, 
and  "  righteousness,"  as  justification  by  faith,  or  even 
as  imputed  righteousness.  But  without  falling  into 
these  inaccuracies,  many  interpreters,  like  Godet  and 
Westcott,  assign  a  larger  sense  to  the  terms  than  that 
which  we  have  just  described.  My  judgment  is  that 
strict  exegesis  requires  us  to  adhere  to  the  more 
specific  reference  of  the  words,  but  we  do  not  thereby 
limit  the  wider  ranges  of  truth  which  they  suggest 
and  involve.^  The  meaning  of  the  passage,  taking  its 
three  subjects  in  order,  seems  to  be  :  The  sinful  world 
rejects  Christ ;  in  this  it  is  contrary  to  truth  and  right. 
The  Spirit  in  his  work  will  take  up  the  cause  of  truth 
and  right,  and  set  the  world  clearly  in  the  wrong  in 
this  matter  of  refusing  to  believe  on  Christ.  The 
Spirit  will  prove  the  world  to  be  in  the  wrong  in  this 
matter,  just  because  it  is  in  the  wrong ;  that  is,  the 
Spirit   will   take   the   world   in    its    wrong    attitude 

1  The  larger  ^bearings  of  the  passage,  without  carelessness 
of  exegesis,  are  admirably  set  forth  in  Hare's  Mission  of  the 
Comforter. 


214  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

toward  Christ  and  show  it  that  it  is  wrong' ;  the  Spirit 
will  disclose  to  the  world  the  real  nature  of  its  oppo- 
sition to  Christ  as  sin.  The  passage  treats,  in  this 
part  of  it,  primarily  and  directly  of  the  sin  of  reject- 
ing Christ  and  his  mission,  and  of  the  fact  that  the 
Spirit  will  convince  the  world  that  in  so  rejecting 
him  it  was  in  the  wrong,  and  will  convict  it  of  its 
guilt  in  consequence.  By  analogy,  however,  the  pas- 
sage may  be  applied  to  the  relation  of  unbelief  to  sin 
in  general,  as  by  Westcott :  "  The  want  of  belief  in 
Christ,  when  he  is  made  known,  lies  at  the  root  of  all 
sin,  and  reveals  its  nature.  .  ,  .  The  Spirit  therefore 
starts  from  the  fact  of  unbelief  in  the  Son  of  Man,  and 
through  that  lays  open  what  sin  is."  ^ 

The  second  proposition  of  the  passage  is  more  diffi- 
cult :  The  Spirit  will  convince  the  world  concerning 
righteousness,  because  Jesus  is  going  to  the  Father, 
and  the  disciples  will  see  him  no  more.  If  the  sin 
which  the  previous  indictment  contemplates  is  pri- 
marily the  sin  of  rejecting  Christ,  the  righteousness  in 
question  here  is  probably  the  righteousness  of  Christ. 
The  world  has  deemed  him  unrighteous,  and  has  put 
him  to  death  as  such.  The  Spirit  will  prove  that  he 
was  righteous,  and  will  put  the  world  in  the  wrong. 
This  the  Spirit  will  do  by  appeal  to  Christ's  ascension 
and  glorification.  The  withdrawal  of  his  visible  pres- 
ence from  them  is  the  condition  of  the  Spirit's  com- 
ing and  work  (xvi.  7),  and  the  ascension  to  heaven 
is  the   perfect    vindication   of    his  mission.     These 

^  Commentary,  in  loco. 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      215 

facts  the  Spirit  can,  as  we  may  say,  urge  against 
the  world's  view  of  Christ's  character.  When  the 
Father  takes  him  to  his  side,  and  when  the  hindrances 

—  such  as  prejudice,  disappointment,  and  personal 
antipathy  —  to  a  just  appreciation  of  him  which  have 
been  incidental  to  his  visible  presence  among  them 
are  withdrawn,  then  it  will  appear  that  the  world 
misjudged  him.  If  the  strict  demands  of  exegesis 
yield  this  more  limited  sense  of  the  words,  it  is  not 
thereby  denied  that  they  suggest,  and  are  legitimately 
applied  to,  the  true  idea  of  righteousness  as  repre- 
sented in  the  life  of  Jesus.  This  application  of  them 
is  made  by  President  Dwight :  "  The  Spirit,  while 
laying  hold  upon  and  pressing  the  fact  that  Christ 
goes  away  to  the  Father,  so  that  he  is  seen  no  more, 

—  that  is,  the  great  consummation  of  his  work  in  the 
ascension  to  heaven,  —  will  convince  the  world  of  his 
idea  of  righteousness :  that  righteousness  consists  in 
the  union  of  the  heart  with  God,  the  entrance  to 
which  is  through  faith."  ^ 

The  third  element  in  the  conviction  of  the  world 
hj  the  Spirit  is  in  respect  to  judgment.  The  Spirit 
will  prove  to  the  world  that  its  prince  stands  con- 
demned (/ce/cptrai).  This  result  is  viewed  as  already 
accomplished  when  Jesus  spoke.  The  work  of  Jesus 
is  the  victory  over  Satan.  "  Now,"  he  says  as  he 
contemplates  its  completion,  "now  is  the  judgment 
of  this  world :  now  shall  the  prince  of  this  world  be 

1  Notes  added  to  the  American  edition  of  Godet's  Commen- 
tary, ii.  514. 


216  THE  JOIIANNINE  THEOLOGY 

cast  out"  (xii.  31).  The  finished  work  of  Jesus  in- 
volves the  final  sentence  of  him  in  whom  the  spirit  of 
opposition  to  himself  is  concentrated ;  the  Spirit  will 
affirm  and  justify  that  sentence  and  so  in  the  matter 
of  judgment  convince  the  world. 

In  what  manner  is  this  work  of  the  Spirit  effected  ? 
Is  it  hj  his  direct  operation  upon  the  hearts  of  un- 
believing men,  or  indirectly,  through  the  testimony 
and  teaching  of  believers  ?  The  indications  point  to 
the  latter  as  the  method  which  the  passage  contem- 
plates. The  work  of  the  Spirit  in  question  is  de- 
scribed in  immediate  connection  with  the  statement 
that  he  will  be  sent  to  the  disciples  (tt^o?  vytta?, 
verse  7).  The  phrase:  "  When  he  is  come  "  {eXdcov) 
in  verse  8  clearly  refers  back  to  the  coming  to  the 
disciples  (^iXeva-erai)  spoken  of  in  verse  7.  The 
specific  conviction  of  the  world  which  our  passage 
describes  is  wrought  through  the  instrumentality  of 
the  disciples  in  whom  the  Spirit  dwells.  The  illus- 
tration or  proof  of  it  which  lies  nearest  at  hand  is 
found  in  the  successful  preaching  of  the  apostles. 
Nothing  is  here  said  as  to  how  far  the  world  will 
acknowledge  itself  to  be  in  the  wrong  respecting  sin, 
righteousness,  and  judgment.  According  as  it  does  or 
does  not  acknowledge  the  truth  of  the  Spirit's  indict- 
ment against  it,  is  the  way  open  to  faith  and  conver- 
sion, or  to  increased  unbelief  and  moral  hardening. 
In  understanding,  with  most  interpreters,  that  the 
conviction  of  the  world  in  question  is  conceived  of  as 
wrought  mediately  through  believers,  we  in  no  way 


THE   DOCTRINE  OF   THE   HOLY   SPIRIT      217 

call  in  question  the  universal  operation  of  the  Holy- 
Spirit  upon  mankind ;  especially  is  this  the  case  if  the 
more  specific  interpretation  of  the  Spirit's  eXe7ft9  be 
adopted.  The  considerations  which  favor  the  view 
of  the  Spirit's  work  here  described,  as  mediated 
through  believers,  are  favorable  to  the  more  specific 
reference  of  the  passage  as  a  whole. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION 

Literature.  —  Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.,  Of  Faith,  ii.  455- 
468  (orig.  ii.  508-524);  Weiss:  Johann.  Lehrh.,  Der  Begriff  des 
Glaubens,  pp.  18-28,  and  Bihl.  Theol.,  Faith  and  Fellowship 
with  Christ,  ii.  363-370  (orig.  626-632);  Wkxdt:  Teaching  oj 
Jesus,  Faith  in  Jesus  according  to  the  Johannine  Discourses, 
ii.  329-339  (orig.  595-602);  Frommann:  Johann.  Lehrh.,  Aneig- 
nung  des  Heils,  u.  s.  w.,  p.  548  sq.,  especially  pp.  551-563; 
Beyschlag:  Neutest.  Theol,  Der  Glaube,  u.  s.  w.,  ii.  447-452; 
Neander  :  Planting  and  Training,  Faith  as  the  Principle  of  a 
New  Life,  ii.  41-47  (Bohn  ed.). 

Salvation  is  appropriated  by  faith.  We  accordingly 
turn  to  a  study  of  its  nature  and  contents.  The  word 
faith  (jrCarL<i')  does  not  occur  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
and  is  found  only  once  in  the  Epistles  (I.  v.  4).  The 
verb  to  believe  QmaTeveLv)  is,  however,  one  of  the  com- 
monest words  in  our  sources,  occurring  more  than 
one  hundred  times.  There  is  no  lack  of  emphasis, 
therefore,  upon  the  idea  of  faith  in  John's  writings. 

We  shall  soon  see  that  the  conception  of  faith  is 
not  so  uniform  and  definite  in  John  as  in  Paul  and 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  I  do  not  think  that  any 
definition  of  faith  could  be  framed  which  would  ade- 
quately cover  all  the  shades  of  meaning  and  variety 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION       219 

of  emphasis  in  which  John  employs  the  word.  It 
naturally  results  from  this  variation  in  usage  that 
interpreters  differ  considerably  in  their  judgment  as 
to  the  central  and  characteristic  idea  in  John's  doc- 
trine of  faith.  It  will  be  our  first  task  to  illustrate 
this  variety  by  studying  the  uses  of  the  terms  in 
question. 

There  are  numerous  passages  in  which  iriareveiv  is 
used  in  the  sense  of  believing  that  a  thing  is  true. 
It  is  assent  to  a  proposition,  a  Furwahrhalten.  Thus 
the  apostle  states  that  his  aim  in  writing  the  Gospel 
was  that  his  readers  might  "  believe  that  Jesus  was 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  although  he  immediately 
carries  us  beyond  the  idea  of  mere  theoretic  assent 
by  adding :  "  and  that  believing  ye  may  have  life  in 
his  name  "  (  xx.  31).  In  the  First  Epistle,  where  the 
writer  is  refuting  and  condemning  that  false  gnosis 
which  denied  the  true  incarnation  and  saving  work 
of  the  Son  of  God,  he  represents  faith  as  the  oppo- 
site of  this  denial :  "  Whosoever  believeth  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ  is  begotten  of  God "  (I.  v.  1). 
This  belief  is  the  "  confession "  (ii.  22 ;  iv.  15)  of 
Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  in  contrast  to  the  anti- 
christian  spirit  of  denial.  In  this  connection,  there- 
fore, faith  is  an  affirmation.  Similarly  in  xi.  27 
Martha  asserts  her  faith  in  the  words :  "  I  have  be- 
lieved that  thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  even 
he  that  cometh  into  the  world ; "  and  in  his  high- 
priestly  prayer  Jesus  asks  that  his  disciples  may  be 
one,  in   order   that  the  world  may  believe  that  the 


220  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Father  sent  him  (xvii.  21).  We  can  only  justly  esti- 
mate the  full  religious  significance  and  contents  of 
this  assent  to  Jesus'  sonship  to  God  and  mission  to 
the  world  after  we  have  passed  in  review  other  classes 
of  passages. 

In  several  places  to  believe  means  to  credit  some 
word  or  assertion  or  to  accept  the  testimony  of  some 
person.  After  the  resurrection,  the  disciples  are  said 
to  have  remembered  the  saying  of  Jesus,  "  Destroy 
this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up,"  "  and 
they  believed  the  scripture,  and  the  word  which  Jesus 
had  said"  (ii.  22).  Jesus  declares  to  the  Jews:  "If 
ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  believe  me ;  for  he  wrote 
of  me.  But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  how  shall 
ye  believe  my  words  ? "  (v.  46, 47).  Again,  he  accuses 
the  Jews  of  not  believing  him  just  because  he  speaks 
to  them  the  truth  (viii.  45, 46) ;  and  elsewhere  he  tells 
them  that  even  if  they  give  no  credence  to  him  they 
should  "  believe  the  works,"  that  is,  should  admit  the 
truth  of  the  testimony  which  is  contained  in  his  mir- 
acles (x.  37,  38).  It  is  obvious  that  in  all  the  pas- 
sages thus  far  cited,  the  intellectual  aspect  of  faith  is 
placed  in  the  foreground.  Whatever  more  may  be 
fairly  implied  in  consequence  of  the  nature  of  the 
trutlis  believed  in,  these  passages  speak  of  an  assent 
of  the  mind  to  certain  statements  or  testimony. 
To  believe  —  in  the  sense  of  these  passages  —  is  to 
hold  for  true  the  statement  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of 
God,  or  to  cherish  the  conviction  that  his  teaching 
is  true. 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION       221 

In  close  connection  with  this  set  of  passages  should 
be  placed  another,  in  which  Jesus  distinctly  recognizes 
a  gradation  in  faith  as  respects  its  religious  signifi- 
cance and  value.  Some  reason  will  be  found  for  the 
view  that  faith  is  conceived  of  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
as  a  development  having  its  incipient  and  defective 
stages,  when  it  reposes  upon  inadequate  grounds,  and 
advancing  toward  perfection  as  it  comes  to  rest  more 
completely  upon  the  best  and  deepest  reasons.  An 
illustration  is  found  in  the  conversation  between 
Jesus  and  Nathanael  (i.  47-51).  The  latter  is  aston- 
ished at  Jesus'  supernatural  knowledge  of  himself, 
and  at  once  confesses  him  as  the  Son  of  God  and 
King  of  Israel.  "  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him, 
Because  I  said  unto  thee,  I  saw  thee  underneath  the 
fig  tree,  believest  thou  ?  thou  shalt  see  greater  things 
than  these."  The  meaning  is,  that  his  penetration 
into  Nathanael's  thoughts  is  a  slender  basis  for  faith 
in  himself,  and  that  a  faith  so  supported  must  be  cor- 
respondingly deficient.  More  adequate  grounds  for 
his  faith  will  be  disclosed  as  time  goes  on,  when  he 
shall  see  how  Jesus  lives  in  constant  intercourse  with 
God  his  Father, —  symbolically  described  under  the 
figure  of  angels  ascending  from  him  into  the  open 
heavens,  and  descending  thence  upon  him  in  minis- 
tries of  comfort.  Another  illustration  is  found  in  the 
fact  that  many  Jews  in  Jerusalem  at  the  passover 
"  believed  on  his  name  {eTriarevcrav  et?  to  ovofxa  avrov), 
beholding  his  signs  which  he  did."  "  But,"  adds  the 
apostle,  "  Jesus  did  not  trust  himself  unto  them,"  — 


222  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

did  not  yield  his  confidence  to  them  {avTo<;  8e  *lr]<rov<i 
ov/c  eiriarevev  avTov  avToU,  ii.  23,  24).  Why  ?  Because 
the  greatest  element  of  their  belief  was  mere  wonder 
at  his  miracles.  Their  faith  was  based  upon  no 
proper  appreciation  of  his  person  and  work.  It  was 
wanting,  therefore,  in  real  spiritual  power ;  it  rested 
upon  deficient  grounds,  and  was  itself  correspondingly 
defective.  The  point  which  the  apostle  emphasizes 
by  the  play  on  the  word  TnareveLv  may  be  partially 
brought  out  by  rendering :  They  believed  on  him,  but 
he  did  not  believe  in  them,  for  he  knew  the  real  super ' 
ficiality  of  their  professed  faith. 

A  gradation  in  the  quality  of  faith  corresponding 
to  the  character  of  its  grounds,  is  recognized  in  the 
narrative  concerning  the  belief  of  the  Samaritan 
woman  and  her  neighbors  (iv.  39-42).  Many  of  her 
acquaintances  "  believed  on  him  "  on  the  basis  of  her 
statement  respecting  the  supernatural  knowledge  of 
her  life  which  he  had  shown.  But  when  they  after- 
wards, during  two  days,  heard  Jesus  himself,  they 
said  to  the  woman,  "  No  longer  (ovKen)  do  we  believe 
because  of  thy  speaking  {XaXid) :  for  we  have  our- 
selves heard,  and  know  that  this  is  indeed  the  Saviour 
of  the  world"  (iv.  42).  The  difference  between  a 
confidence  which  rested  upon  the  testimony  of  another 
and  a  faith  which  was  won  from  personal  contact 
with  Jesus,  is  here  sharply  emphasized.  Nor  would 
it  be  merely  prophetic  or  supernatural  knowledge 
which  those  with  whom  he  abode  two  days  would  find 
in  him.     This  association  would  inevitably  give  them 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION        223 

some  larger  idea  of  his  work  and  mission,  some  fuller 
appreciation  of  his  personality  and  spirit. 

A  striking  illustration  of  the  fact  that  John  pre- 
supposes a  development  of  faith  which  proceeds  in 
proportion  as  faith  finds  its  truest  and  deepest  grounds, 
is  seen  where  Jesus  explains  to  the  Jews  his  mission 
and  work,  and  chides  them  for  their  hostility  to  him- 
self (viii.  12-30).  "  As  he  spake  these  things,"  says 
the  apostle,  "  many  believed  on  him  "  (viii.  30).  But 
what  was  the  nature  of  this  faith?  The  following 
verses  make  the  answer  clear  :  "  Jesus  therefore  said 
to  those  Jews  which  had  believed  him,  If  ye  abide  in 
my  word,  then  are  ye  truly  my  disciples  ;  and  ye  shall 
know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free  " 
(viii.  31,  32).  Theirs  certainly  was  a  faith  which  was 
but  superficial  and  rudimentary  ;  it  was  the  result  of 
a  passing  impression  and  interest.  It  was  scarcely 
more  than  a  germ  of  real,  enduring,  saving  faith. 
Jesus  did  not  therefore  regard  it  as  truly  making  them 
his  disciples,  nor  as  yet  involving  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth  and  securing  the  freedom  which  the  truth 
bestows  ;  this  it  could  do  only  if  it  was  completed  by 
a  continuance  in  his  word,  that  is,  by  a  thorough- 
going reception  of  his  truth,  and  by  a  life  which 
answered  to  its  demands. 

From  those  in  whom  the  capacity  for  this  higher 
and  completer  faith  is  wanting,  Jesus  seeks  to  call 
forth  the  lower  kind  of  faith,  for  the  lower  contains 
the  germ  of  the  higher,  and  is  capable  of  ripening  into 
it.     The  expectation  of  the  Jewish  people  that  a  very 


224  THE  JOHANXINE   THEOLOGY 

prominent  part  of  the  Messiah's  work  should  be  to  do 
"  signs  and  wonders  "  made  them  more  susceptible  to 
the  evidence  of  miracles  than  to  any  other  proof  which 
Jesus  gave  of  his  divine  commission.  Jesus  welcomed 
a  confidence  in  himself  which  was  based  only  upon  his 
works,  not  so  much  for  its  own  immediate  religious 
value  as  because  it  might  conduct  in  those  whom  it 
attached  to  himself  to  a  true  personal  trust,  which 
should  be  based  upon  adequate  reasons.  But  he  dis- 
tinctly asserted  the  inferiority  of  such  belief.  He 
distinguished  between  believing  him  and  believing 
his  works  (x.  38).  He  says,  in  effect,  to  his  disciples, 
in  allusion  to  their  partial  and  defective  faith :  Be- 
lieve on  me  for  such  reasons  as  you  can  appreciate ; 
believe  on  me  for  what  I  am,  if  you  can,  but  if  mir- 
acles alone  seem  to  you  to  be  plain  proof  of  divinity, 
believe  me  on  account  of  them  (xiv.  11),  A  faith 
which  is  based  upon  external  evidences  of  his  divine 
power  is  better  than  none,  because  it  may  ripen  and 
deepen  into  a  faith  which  grasps  the  divinity  which 
speaks  in  his  whole  life  and  spirit,  and  which  meets 
and  satisfies  the  spiritual  longings  and  wants  of  the 
soul ;  but  such  a  faith  is  wanting  in  vitality  and  spir- 
itual power,  because  it  does  not  spring  from  what  is 
deepest  in  man,  or  lay  hold  upon  what  is  deepest  in 
Christ. 

A  concrete  example  which  illustrates  a  similar  dis- 
tinction is  found  in  the  narrative  concerning  the 
transition  of  Thomas  from  doubt  to  belief  in  regard  to 
the  reality  of  the  Lord's  appearance  after  the  resur- 


THE   APPROPRfATION   OV   SALVATION       225 

rection  (xx.  24-29).  Thomas  demanded  tangible 
evidence  before  he  would  believe.  Jesus  made  this 
demand  the  occasion  of  laying  down  the  great  general 
truth,  "  Because  thou  hast  seen  me  thou  hast  be- 
lieved :  blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen  and  yet 
have  believed''  (verse  29).  This  is  the  beatitude  of 
those  who  have  never  seen  Christ  in  the  flesh.  A 
special  blessing  is  pronounced  for  those  who  believe, 
though  not  having  seen,  because  their  faith  must  rest 
upon  deeper  reasons  than  any  which  can  offer  them- 
selves to  the  senses.  Such  faith  springs  from  a  sense 
of  spiritual  need  and  from  the  recognition  of  the 
adaptation  of  Christ  to  satisfy  it.  It  rests,  therefore, 
upon  grounds  which  lie  deep  in  human  nature,  and 
has  its  motive  in  the  clear  recognition  of  Christ  as 
the  bread  of  life  to  the  soul.  A  true  faith  thus  finds 
itself  embracing  more  and  more  that  which  is  central 
in  the  life  and  person  of  Jesus,  and  depending  less 
and  less  upon  whatever  is  incidental  or  extraneous. 
Such  faith  rises  into  the  heavens  and  finds  its  home 
in  the  very  heart  of  Christ.  Its  true  sphere  is  the 
sphere  of  the  spirit.  Though  it  may  once  have  known 
Christ  after  the  flesh,  yet  as  it  grows  and  deepens,  it 
at  last  knows  him  so  no  more  (2  Cor.  v.  16). ^ 

1  The  distinction  which  we  are  tracing  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
between  outer  and  inner,  or  sensuous  and  spiritual,  aids  to  faith, 
Mr.  Whittier  has  beautifully  illustrated  in  his  poem  Palestine, 
the  closing  stanzas  of  which  I  quote  :  — 

"  And  what  if  my  feet  may  not  tread  where  He  stood, 
Nor  my  ears  hear  the  da.shing  of  Galilee's  flood, 
15 


226  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

To  these  illustrations  of  the  gradual  enlarging  and 
deepening  of  faith  may  be  added,  in  conclusion,  an 
example  which  is  presented  quite  incidentally.  At 
the  miracle  in  Cana  of  Galilee  in  which  Jesus  "  mani- 
fested his  glory,"  it  is  said  that  "  his  disciples  believed 
on  him  "  (ii.  11),  —  that  is,  entered  upon  a  new  stage 
of  faith  as  they  gained  new  assurance  of  his  divine 
power  and  glory. 

A  common  construction  with  Tnarevetv  is  the  prepo- 
sition ek  followed  by  the  object  of  faith,  God,  Christ, 
or  the  name  of  Christ.  Thus  in  xiv.  1:  "  Ye  believe 
in  God  (et?  tov  6e6p),  believe  also  in  me''  (et?  e/Jie). 
The  preposition  designates  the  act  and  disposition 
denoted  by  TnareveLv  as  terminating  upon  its  object 
(i.  12;  iii.  16,  18,  86;  vi.  40;  xii.  44).  We  shall 
have  occasion  later  to  discuss  the  question,  what  is 
the  nature  of  the  relation  expressed  by  the  phrase 
TTca-Teveiv  ek.  Meantime  let  us  note  in  passing  the 
connections  in  which  several  of  these  passages  stand. 
In  i.  12  those  who  "  received  (eXa^ov)  him "  (the 
Word)  or  "  believe  on  his  name"  are  they  to  whom  the 

Nor  my  eyes  see  the  cross  which  He  bowed  him  to  bear, 
Nor  my  knees  press  Gethsemane's  gardea  of  prayer  ? 

"  Yet,  Loved  of  the  Father,  thy  Spirit  is  near 
To  the  meek,  and  the  lowly,  and  penitent  here ; 
And  the  voice  of  thy  love  is  the  same  even  now 
As  at  Bethany's  tomb  or  on  Olivet's  brow. 

"  O,  the  outward  hath  gone  !  —  but  in  glory  and  power, 
The  Spirit  surviveth  the  things  of  an  hour; 
Unchanged,  undecaying,  its  Pentecost  flame 
On  the  heart's  secret  altar  is  burning  the  same!" 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION       227 

right  (i^oucTLa)  has  been  given  "  to  become  children  of 
God."  Here,  evidently,  faith  in  Christ,  or  the  recep- 
tion of  him,  and  sonship  to  God  are  involved  in 
each  other.  In  iii.  36  the  result  of  believing  on  the 
Son  is  declared  to  be  eternal  life,  and  it  is  im- 
plied that  faith  involves  obedience,  since  the  contrast 
to  "  He  that  believeth  "  is  "  He  that  obeyeth  not." 

In  the  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life  faith  is  several 
times  referred  to,  as  in  vi.  35  :  "  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
I  am  the  bread  of  life :  he  that  cometh  to  me  shall 
not  hunger,  and  he  that  believeth  on  me  shall  never 
thirst."  Here,  believing  on  him  and  coming  to  him 
are  identical,  and  both  phrases  are  equivalent  to  the 
eating  of  the  bread  of  life,  as  both  the  context  (cf. 
verses  33,  50,  51)  and  the  use  of  the  figurative  terms 
"  hunger  "  and  "  thirst "  in  the  verse  itself  show.  In 
verse  40  believing  on  the  Son  is  associated  with  be- 
holding him,  and  its  result  is  declared  to  be  eternal 
life ;  while  in  verse  47  believing  is  clearly  equivalent 
to  coming  to  him  {cf.  verse  45),  and  is  said  to  be  the 
result  of  having  heard  and  learned  from  the  Father.  In 
xii.  44-46  belief  on  Christ  is  affirmed  to  involve  belief 
on  God.  This  faith  in  him  who  is  "  come  a  light  into 
the  world  "  secures  for  its  possessor  the  result  that  he 
does  not  walk  in  darkness.  It  will  be  necessary  to 
recur  to  these  ideas  with  which  faith  is  associated,  in  a 
closer  consideration  of  the  nature  of  faith,  to  which 
our  review  of  passages  will  conduct  us. 

In  several  passages  Tricrrevetv  stands  without  an 
object  and  without  any  expressed  or  implied  explana- 


228  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

tion  (e.  g.i.l',  iii.  12).  In  these  cases  it  is  obvious 
that  it  denotes  the  right  religious  attitude  or  disposi- 
tion of  the  soul  toward  Christ.  Eternal  life  is  said 
to  be  its  consequence :  "  He  that  believeth  hath  eter- 
nal life  "  (vi.  47,  cf.  iii.  15).  This  believing  is  con- 
ceived of  as  identical  with  that  possession  of  Christ 
which  is  mentioned  in  the  First  Epistle,  whose  result 
is  also  "  the  life  "  (J)  ?wr;),  that  is,  the  true,  eternal 
life :  "  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  the  life  ;  he  that 
hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the  life  "  (I.  v.  12). 
The  fact,  too,  that  the  consequence  of  faith  is  the 
present  possession  of  eternal  life  —  "  hath  (e%€i)  eter- 
nal life  "  —  is  not  to  be  overlooked  in  considering  the 
nature  of  faith.  In  John's  view  faith  is  certainly 
used  in  a  sense  sufficiently  comprehensive  to  include 
all  that  man  can  do,  or  is  required  to  do,  in  appro- 
priating the  salvation  which  is  offered  in  Christ. 
When,  therefore,  the  disciples  asked  Jesus  what  they 
must  do  that  they  might  work  the  works  of  God,  his 
answer  was :  "  This  is  the  work  of  God,"  —  the  sum 
of  God's  requirement,  —  "  that  ye  believe  "  (note  the 
present,  Xva  Tna-revrjTe,  "  continue  to  believe ; "  cf. 
the  aorist,  ha  Trio-revarjTe,  xiii.  19)  "  on  him  whom 
he  hath  sent "  (vi.  28,  29). 

Our  review  of  the  principal  passages  which  bear 
upon  the  subject  gives  rise  to  the  general  inquiry  as 
to  the  nature  and  contents  of  Christian  faith  as  pre- 
sented in  our  sources.  The  opinion  of  Weiss  on  this 
question  is  that  faith  in  John's  writings  is  the  per- 
suasion that  Jesus  is  what  he  claims  to  be,  the  con- 


THE   APPROPRIATION  OF   SALVATION       229 

fession  that  he  is  the  Christ  or  the  Son  of  God.  This 
author  rejects  the  view  that  the  notion  of  mystical 
union  with  Christ  is  any  part  of  the  Johannine  idea 
of  faith.  "  The  confident  persuasion  that  Jesus  is  the 
Son  of  God "  is  faith.^  The  result  is  that  faith  is 
regarded  as  a  stage  of  knowledge,  and  we  have  al- 
ready seen  (pp.  66,  67)  that  Weiss  seeks  to  exclude 
from  the  knowledge  of  God  and  of  Christ  every 
touch  of  mysticism.  Our  author,  tlierefore,  makes 
a  sharp  distinction  between  faith  in  Christ  and  being 
in  Christ.  "  Abiding  in  Christ  is  not  faith,  but  it 
presupposes  faith.  This  abiding  is  the  personal  sur- 
render to  him  in  which  the  new  relation  to  Christ 
which  faith  has  brought  about  is  continually  com- 
pleted anew  with  conscious  self-determination."  ^  It 
is  obvious  that  faith  is  thus  conceived  as  the  subjec- 
tive condition  of  abiding  in  Christ,  or  the  condition 
precedent  of  the  religious  life,  rather  than  as  the 
actual  entrance  into  that  spiritual  relation  to  the 
Redeemer.  Union  with  Christ  is  a  result  of  faith, 
quite  distinct  from  it  and  following  upon  it  both 
logically  and  chronologically.  Faith  is  an  intellec- 
tual assent  to  the  claims  of  Jesus,  a  mental  affirma- 
tion of  the  proposition :  He  is  the  Messiah  or  the 
Son  of  God. 

It  is  a  matter  of  some  interest  that  on  this  point 
Weiss  coincides  with  the  school  of  Ritschl,  to  whose 
opinions   in   general   he   is   so   strenuously    opposed. 

1  Bibl.  Theol.,  §  149  a,  note  2.     Cf.  Johann.  Lehrbegrlff,  p.  19  sq 

2  BiU.  Theol,  §  U9  c. 


230  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

Both  are  at  one  in  eliminating  from  faith  the  mys- 
tical element.  This  disposition  may  be  illustrated, 
on  the  side  of  the  school  of  Eitschl,  by  the  following 
citations  from  Wendt:  "In  these  Johannine  dis- 
courses the  disposition  designated  as  that  which 
should  be  shown  toward  the  person  of  Jesus  is,  ac- 
cording to  its  peculiar  nature,  regarded  as  the  right 
disposition  toward  his  teaching  (Yerkiindigung),  and 
the  faith  which  is  required  in  him  consists  in  nothing 
else  than  in  the  trustful  and  obedient  recognition, 
reception,  and  following  of  that  teaching,  which  re- 
vealed God,  showed  the  right,  and  effected  salvation, 
and  which  constitutes  his  Messianic  calling."  ^  This 
author,  however,  carries  his  exclusion  of  mysticism 
much  farther  than  Weiss,  and  goes  so  far  as  to  deny 
that  the  allegory  of  the  Vine  and  the  Branches  (xv. 
1  sg.),  the  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life  (vi.  32 
sqS),  and  other  passages  which  describe  the  abiding 
of  his  disciples  in  Christ,  imply  anything  of  the 
nature  of  "  a  mystical  union  of  the  disciples  with  his 
glorified  heavenly  nature.  They  are  rather  the  ener- 
getic declaration  of  the  fact  that  Jesus  based  his 
saving  significance  entirely  upon  the  word  of  teach- 
ing which  he,  as  man,  exercised  upon  earth,  and 
that  he  regarded  the  necessary  disposition  of  other 
men  towards  him  as  consisting  in  the  inward  recep- 
tion of  his  teaching  exercised  by  him  on  earth  as 
man."  ^     In  this  view  the  idea  of  union  with  Christ  is 

1  Teaching  of  Jesus,  ii.  331  (orig.  p.  597). 

2  Jbid.,  ii.  335  (orig.  pp.  599,  600). 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION       231 

not  only  excluded  from  faith,  but  it  is  banished  alto- 
gether from  Christianity ;  it  does  not  even  remain  as 
a  result  of  faith,  distinct  and  generically  different 
from  it,  as  in  the  opinion  of  Weiss. 

For  purposes  of  comparison  let  us  now  set  beside 
these  anti-mystical  expositions  of  faith  in  John,  some 
examples  of  another  mode  of  view.  For  Neander, 
faith  is,  with  John  as  with  Paul,  self-surrender  to 
Christ  and  entrance  into  communion  with  him.  "  By 
this  faith  entrance  is  made  into  fellowship  with  the 
Redeemer,  and  at  the  same  time  a  participation 
obtained  in  his  divine  life.  .  .  .  According  to 
John's  conception,  it  is  impossible  to  separate  either 
faith  or  knowledge  from  the  life."  ^  The  definition 
of  Frommann  is  of  similar  import :  "  Faith  presup- 
poses the  knowledge  of  Christ,  and  is  a  necessary  con- 
sequence of  it.  But  according  to  its  inner  nature 
faith  is  an  inward,  humble  trust  in  the  saving  love  of 
God  which  is  revealed  in  Christ,  and  must  accord- 
ingly express  itself  in  a  trustful  obedience  to  the 
Redeemer,  and  in  the  life  and  conduct  of  men."  ^ 

Beyschlag  has  taken  up  this  question  with  special 
reference  to  the  opinions  of  Weiss.^  He  maintains 
that  in  the  Johannine  applications  of  the  idea  of  faith 
the  two  sides,  conviction  and  confidence  or  trust,  are 
inseparably  bound  together,  and  that  the  recent  opin- 
ion as  held  by  Weiss  ("  If  I  rightly  understand  him," 

1  Planting  and  Training,  ii.  42,  43  (Bohn  ed.). 

2  Johann.  Lehrbegriff,  p.  557. 
8  Neutesl.  TheoL,  ii.  447-449. 


232  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

adds  Beyschlag  in  a  note)  that  in  distinction  from 
Paul  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  John  means  by 
faith  only  the  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  fact  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  but  not  trust  (das  Vertrauen) 
in  God's  love  in  Christ,  is  as  incorrect  as  possible 
(moglichst  verfehlt).  "The  full  Johannine  idea  of 
faith  is,  the  laying  hold  and  appropriation  of  eternal 
life,  which  God  offers  in  Jesus."  ^ 

Our  review  of  the  leading  passages  which  speak  of 
faitli  in  the  writings  of  John  has  already  shown  to 
which  of  these  expositions  we  must  give  our  adher- 
ence. The  opinion  of  Weiss  may  be  maintained  in 
its  application  to  some  passages,  but  it  cannot  be 
made  to  square  with  others.  When  in  the  First 
Epistle  John  is  contrasting  faith  with  the  spirit  of 
antichristian  denial,  it  is  no  doubt  assent  to  the  Mes- 
siahship  and  divine  sonship  of  Jesus  which  he  means 
by  faith,  although  it  can  be  shown  that,  in  the  nature 
of  the  case,  faith,  in  that  connection,  also  involves 
much  besides.  But  to  make  the  passages  which 
speak  of  faith  in  (TriareveLv  et?)  Christ  or  in  his  name, 
and  especially  when  they  are  associated  with  the  idea 
of  receiving  him,  appropriating  him  as  the  heavenly 
bread,  or  as  involving  the  present  possession  of 
eternal  life,  —  to  make  these  passages,  I  say,  refer  only 
to  a  conviction  of  Jesus'  sonship  to  God,  is  little  less 
than  preposterous.  Wlio  can  believe  that  when  Jesus 
said,  "Ye  believe  in  God,  believe  also  in  me  "  (xiv.  1) 
he  meant,  "  You  believe  that  God  exists,  believe  also 
1  Neutest.  Theol,  ii.  4i9. 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALA^ATION       233 

that  I  am  the  Christ "  ?  To  believe  is  to  have  the 
Son  (I.  V.  12) ;  it  is  to  receive  Jesus  Christ  (i.  12, 13) ; 
it  is  to  come  to  the  Son  (vi.  35)  ;  it  is  to  enter  into 
the  possession  of  eternal  life  (vi.  47).  It  is  im- 
possible that  such  functions  and  effects  should  be 
ascribed  to  any  faith  which  is  not  in  its  very  nature 
a  trustful  surrender  of  the  soul  to  Christ,  a  self-re- 
nouncing acceptance  of  his  person,  and  an  entrance 
into  life-fellowship  with  him. 

It  is  true,  as  our  examination  of  the  passages  has 
shown,  that  there  is  recognized  in  John  an  incipient 
or  rudimentary  faith  which,  in  certain  specified  cases, 
amounted  to  little  more  than  an  intellectual  convic- 
tion. Such  was  the  "  faith  "  of  those  who  were  won 
by  miracles  only,  to  whom  Jesus  would  not  trust 
himself  (ii.  23,  24) ;  such  was  the  "  faith "  of  the 
Samaritans,  who  believed  from  hearsay  that  Jesus 
had  supernatural  knowledge  (iv,  39).  But  it  is  easy 
to  see  that  this  sort  of  "  faith  "  is  represented  in  the 
gospel  as  inadequate.  Eternal  life  is  never  said  to 
be  the  effect  or  reward  of  such  faith.  True  faith,  the 
believing  reception  of  Christ  as  Saviour,  is  clearly  dis- 
tinguished from  this  mere  belief  or  opinion.  Where 
the  true  nature  of  faith  is  set  forth,  it  is  seen  to  in- 
volve the  constitution  of  a  new  spiritual  relation  to 
Christ. 

If  the  question  be  considered  abstractly  rather  than 
exegetically,  the  view  of  Weiss  does  not  commend 
itself.  There  lies  in  the  very  nature  of  the  objects  of 
faith  a  reason  for  maintaining  that  faith  is  no  mere 


234  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

conviction,  opinion,  or  holding  for  true,  but  also,  and 
much  more,  a  personal  relation  of  sympathy  and  fel- 
lowship. Take,  for  example,  the  faith  which  is  repre- 
sented in  the  First  Epistle  as  the  confession  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  or  that  he  is  come  in  the 
flesh  (iv.  2,  15  ;  v.  5).  This  confession  is  not  a  mere 
theoretic  assent.  It  is  also  described  as  a  confession 
of  the  Son  involving  the  possession  of  the  Father 
(ii.  22),  as  a  receiving  of  the  witness  of  God  (v.  9), 
as  a  possession  of  the  Son  and  an  obtaining  of  life  in 
consequence  (v.  12),  and  as  believing  on  the  name  of 
the  Son  of  God.  The  apostle  is  clearly  speaking  of  a 
faith  which  is  the  condition  of  the  new  spiritual  birth, 
and  which  is  the  secret  of  the  Christian's  victory  over 
the  world  (v.  4).  As  well  might  one  maintain  that 
to  Paul's  mind  the  earliest  Christian  confession  of 
faith,  "  Jesus  is  Lord "  (1  Cor.  xii.  3),  excludes  the 
idea  that  faith  in  the  Pauline  epistles  means  a  per- 
sonal trust  in  Jesus  Christ  and  an  entrance  into  fel- 
lowship with  liim,  as  to  hold  that  John's  Christian 
confession,  which  he  is  upholding  against  those  who 
deny  it,  is  in  any  way  inconsistent  with  the  so-called 
mystical  element  in  faith.  Less  clearly  and  explic- 
itly, but  not  less  really,  than  Paul,  does  John  repre- 
sent faith  as  the  subjective  principle  of  the  new  life. 
It  stands  organically  related  to  the  abiding  fellowship 
with  Christ,  which  constitutes  the  Christian  life.  It 
is  the  initial  act,  on  man's  part,  by  which  he  enters 
into  that  relation  with  Christ  in  which  eternal  life 
has  its  cause  and  ground. 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALTATION        235 

Faith  in  Christ,  as  commonly  represented  in  our 
sources,  is  related  to  abiding  in  Christ  as  the  begin- 
ning is  related  to  the  continuance  of  any  process  or 
relation.  They  may  be  distinguished,  but  they  can- 
not be  separated.  Faith  is  not  a  mere  condition  of 
indwelling  in  Christ,  distinct  in  nature  from  it.  It  is 
the  act  of  entering  upon  that  relation  whose  contin- 
uance is  designated  in  John  as  abiding  in  Christ. 
There  is  a  life  of  faith  as  well  as  an  act  of  faith ;  in 
other  words,  faith  designates  a  permanent  charac- 
teristic of  the  Christian  life,  that  is,  self-renouncing 
trust,  although  its  significance  as  the  initiatory  act  of 
the  Christian  life  is  that  which  is  brought  more  prom- 
inently forward.  Faith  is  commonly  presented  in 
John  as  the  appropriation  of  salvation,  while  abid- 
ing in  Christ  is  the  realization  of  salvation  in  its 
development  and  effects.  We,  accordingly,  distinguish 
these  for  convenience,  and  devote  a  chapter  to  each ; 
but  we  cannot  distinguish  them  in  such  a  way  as  to 
imply  that  the  believer  ever  passes  beyond  faith  and 
leaves  it  behind.  As  truly  as  the  Christian  life  is 
with  Paul  a  matter  of  faith  all  the  way  through  (Rom. 
i.  17),  so  truly  is  it  with  John  a  life  of  love  and  obedi- 
ence, divinely  implanted  in  man,  and  a  constant  moral 
victory  over  the  world  through  faith  (I.  v.  1—1). 

It  remains  to  define  more  particularly  the  various 
grounds  of  testimony  or  evidence  upon  which  Christ- 
ian faith  is  represented  in  the  Johannine  writings  as 
resting.  Three  sources  of  testimony  are  recognized 
which  are  adapted  to  awaken  faith.     The  first  is  the 


236  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

word  of  human  witnesses.  John  the  Baptist  is  said 
to  have  come  "  for  witness,  that  he  might  bear  witness 
of  the  hght,  that  all  might  believe  through  him" 
(i.  7),  —  that  is,  through  John's  testimony.  Here  the 
believing  reception  of  the  light  of  the  Logos  is  re- 
garded as  mediated  through  the  witness-bearing  of 
John.  This  testimony  consisted  in  John's  asserting 
the  pre-eminence  and  pre-existence  of  Jesus  (i,  15), 
and  the  fact  of  the  Spirit's  descent  upon  him  at  his 
baptism  (i.  32),  which  he  witnessed,  and  on  the  basis 
of  which  he  declares  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God 
(i.  34). 

The  second  source  of  evidence  is  Jesus'  own  testi- 
mony concerning  himself.  His  teaching  springs  from 
his  direct,  intimate  knowledge  of  the  things  of  God, 
and  bears  in  itself  the  marks  of  a  divine  origin  for 
those  who  can  perceive  its  true  meaning  and  charac- 
ter (iii.  11,  cf.  verses  20, 21).  The  Son  penetrates  the 
depths  of  the  Father's  will  and  working,  and  his  whole 
mission  of  teaching  and  labor  is  a  revelation  of  the 
Father's  nature  (v.  19-21).  Only  the  Son  who  is  in 
the  bosom  of  the  Father  can  adequately  reveal  him 
(i.  18;  vi.  46),  and  this  revelation  carries  its  own 
attestation;  those  who  have  an  affinity  of  mind  for 
divine  things  believingiy  accept  it  and  come  to  Christ 
(vi.  45). 

But  chief  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  testimony  of  God 
to  the  truth  of  the  claims  made  by  Jesus.  Of  him- 
self, that  is,  apart  from  God,  Jesus  does  nothing. 
His  witness  of  himself  is  not  an  isolated  self-witness. 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OF   SALVATION       237 

The  evidence  which  attests  his  claims  is  primarily 
divine.  John,  indeed,  testified  to  his  Messiahship,  but 
he  does  not  rest  his  case  upon  human  testimony. 
His  miracles  also  attest  his  divine  mission,  but  only 
because  they  are  the  works  which  the  Father  gave 
him  to  accomplish.  All  testimony  is  secondary  to 
that  which  God  himself  gives.  Human  attestation, 
his  own  self-witness,  and  the  evidence  of  miracles  are 
all  grounded  in  the  fact  that  God  has  set  his  seal 
upon  him  as  the  true  Messiah  and  Saviour.  Other 
testimony  is  valuable  only  as  it  accords  with  and 
reflects  the  direct  testimony  given  by  the  Father. 
This  testimony  God  has  already  given  in  the  Old 
Testament,  and  the  force  of  it  appears  to  all  who  can 
discern  the  true  import  of  Sacred  Scripture  in  the 
correspondence  between  the  person  and  work  of  Jesus 
and  the  prophetic  Messianic  ideal.  The  Jews  fail  to 
appreciate  and  receive  this  testimony  because  they 
search  the  Scriptures  to  so  little  purpose.  Their 
spiritual  blindness,  their  selfish  wilfulness,  their  lack 
of  love  to  God,  their  vainglorious  spirit,  —  these  are 
the  reasons  why  they  do  not  receive  God's  testimony 
concerning  the  Messiah  and  accept  him  (v.  30-47 ; 
cf.  xii.  41-43). 

Jesus  makes  his  appeal  to  the  minds  and  hearts 
of  men  on  the  ground  that  the  Father  dwells  in  him 
and  speaks  through  him  (xiv.  9, 10).  He  offers  him- 
self to  men  on  the  assumption  that  those  who  have 
the  capacity  and  disposition  to  perceive  God  revealing 
himself  in  him  will  do  so,  and  will  take  a  practical 


238  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

attitude  towards  him  which  corresponds  to  this  per- 
ception. He  is,  indeed,  attested  by  works  which  none 
who  came  not  from  God  could  do.  This  species  of 
testimony  John  sums  up  in  the  First  Epistle  in  stating 
the  three-fold  witness  which  God  has  borne  to  Jesus  : 
"  There  are  three  who  bear  witness,  the  Spirit,  and 
the  water,  and  the  blood  :  and  the  three  agree  in  one" 
(I.  V.  8).  The  bestowment  of  the  Spirit,  his  Messi- 
anic consecration  at  his  baptism,  and  his  redemptive 
sufferings  and  death,  sum  up  into  themselves  the  tes- 
timony by  which  his  mission  is  attested.  They  stand 
out  as  prominent  and  significant  features  of  the  incar- 
nation. The  work  of  the  Saviour  is  authenticated  not 
only  by  the  signifi.cance  and  attending  circumstances 
of  his  baptism,  which  proved  him  to  be  the  true 
Messiah  and  the  incarnate  Son  of  God  (as  the  Docetic 
errorists  whom  the  apostle  is  confuting  would  them- 
selves admit),  but  also  by  his  sacrificial  death,  and  by 
the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  early  Church, 
both  of  which  bear  the  evidence  in  themselves  of 
divine  saving  deeds.^    In  close  connection  with  this 

^  I  have  given  what  seems  to  me  to  be  the  probable  meaning 
of  this  passage.  There  are,  however,  many  differing  interpreta- 
tioxis.  By  some  "  the  Spirit "  is  understood  to  mean  the  Spirit 
which  descended  upon  him  at  his  baptism,  and  by  others  is  in- 
terpreted subjectively  of  Christ's  own  spirit.  "  Water  and 
blood  "  are  sometimes  referred  to  the  water  and  blood  which 
issued  from  Christ's  side  at  the  crucifixion  (xix.  34),  but  are 
more  commonly  supposed  to  designate  the  sacraments.  A  ma- 
jority of  interpreters  could  probably  be  cited  for  the  view  which 
I  have  embodied  in  the  text. 


THE   APPROPRIATION   OP   SALVATION       239 

objective  testimony  on  which  faith  is  founded,  is  the 
inner  experience  which  corresponds  to  it.  The  ex- 
ternal becomes  internal,  so  that  "  he  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  of  God  hath  the  witness  in  him,"  "  and  the 
witness  is  this,  that  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life, 
and  this  life  is  in  his  Son  "  (I.  v.  10,  11). 

Faith  rests  upon  objective  grounds ;  it  appeals  to 
historic  facts  for  its  justification.  But  it  is  not  mere 
opinion  respecting  these  facts.  John  never  conceives 
of  faith  as  consisting  in  a  mere  intellectual  possession 
of  the  truths  of  the  gospel.  The  whole  nature  em- 
braces them,  or,  more  exactly,  faith  embraces  him  in 
whom  all  these  truths  centre.  Faith  is  neither  a  sub- 
jective play  of  feeling  nor  a  speculative  conviction  or 
assent ;  it  is  a  personal  relation.  It  carries  man  out 
of  himself,  and  commits  him  to  another.  It  is  self- 
renouncing  trust,  repose  of  soul  in  Jesus  Christ.  It 
involves,  therefore,  an  experience  which  tests  and 
proves  the  external  grounds  on  which  it  reposes,  and 
which  gives  to  the  soul  an  assured  certainty  of  their 
validity.  Thus  faith  and  knowledge  are  seen  to  be, 
to  John's  mind,  essentially  one.  Either  may  be 
called  the  condition  of  salvation  (I.  iv.  16  ;  vi,  47  ;  xvii. 
3).  The  true  knowledge  of  divine  things  is  an  eth- 
ical and  spiritual  knowledge  ;  it  is  the  certitude  which 
faith  begets.  The  mysticism  of  John,  then,  for  which 
we  contend,  is  not  a  subjective  mysticism  which  ab- 
sorbs the  soul  in  self-contemplations  and  revery,  but 
an  objective  and  rational  mysticism  which  lives  in  a 
world  of  realities,  apprehends  divinely  revealed  truth, 


240  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

and  bases  its  experience  upon  it.  It  is  a  mysticism 
which  feeds  not  upon  its  own  feelings  and  fancies,  but 
upon  Christ.  It  involves  an  acceptance  of  him  and  a 
life  of  obedience  to  him.  Its  motto  is:  abiding  in 
Christ. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE   ORIGIN   AND   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE 

Literature.  — Weiss  :  Johann.  LeJirb.,  Christus  das  Leben,  und 
das  Leben  in  Christo,  pp.  29-41,  Das  Sein  in  Cbristo,  u.  s.  w., 
pp.  68-85,  and  Die  Geburt  aus  Gott,  u.  s.  w.,  pp.  86-100;  Bibl. 
TheoL,  Fellowship  with  God  and  Sonshij)  with  God,  ii.  371-376 
(orig.  633-637) ;  Westcott  :  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  Divine 
Fellowship,  pp.  1_74, 17.9;  Baur:  Neutest.  T/ieo^.,  Die  Lehre  und 
die  Reden  Jesu,  u.  s.  w.  (chs.  v.,  vi.),  pp.  372-378 ;  Wendt  :  Teach- 
^'"S'  of  Jesus,  The  Life-bringing  Message,  etc.,  ii.  203-211 
(orig.  pp.  492-498)  ;  Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  TheoL,  Das  Leben  in 
Gott ;  die  Gotteskindschaft,  ii.  452-455 ;  Lechler  :  Apostolic 
and  Post-Apostolic  Times,  Fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with 
the  Son,ii.  201-207  (orig.  pp.  473-479) ;  Van  Oosterzee,  TheoL 
of  the  New  Test.,  The  Son  of  God  in  relation  to  the  World, 
pp.  93-100  (Pt.  ii.  ch.  ii.  §  20);  Schmid  ;  BiU.  TheoL  of  the 
Neto  Test.,  Fellowship  with  Christ,  etc.,  pp.  540-548. 

In  the  present  chapter  I  wish  to  collate  the  principal 
materials  for  the  study  of  John's  conception  of  the 
nature  and  sources  of  the  religious  life  and  character. 
We  have  considered  faith  as  the  act  by  which  a  new 
relation  to  God  is  constituted.  It  is  the  subjective 
condition  of  the  realization  of  salvation.  Correspond- 
ing to  faith  as  initiating  the  work  of  salvation  from 
the  human  side,  is  the  impartation  of  life  from  God, 
or  the  birth  from  above,  which  expresses  the  objective 

16 


242  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

or  divine  side  of  the  sinner's  change  of  relation.  Fol- 
lowing the  spiritual  birth  comes  the  spiritual  life,  which 
is  described  under  various  terms,  such  as  fellowship 
with  God,  abiding  in  Christ,  partaking  of  his  body  and 
blood,  and  so  forth.  The  subject  of  this  chapter,  then, 
is,  John's  conception  of  this  life  of  religion  which  is 
begotten  of  God  in  the  soul.  The  theme  stands  in 
close  connection  with  the  idea  of  faith  which  we  have 
already  examined,  and  certain  special  sides  or  aspects 
of  it  will  come  into  view  in  the  subsequent  study  of 
the  doctrines  of  love,  prayer,  and  eternal  life.  Our 
present  inquiry  is  particularly  directed  to  ascertaining 
the  import  of  such  terms  as,  begotten  from  God,  son- 
ship  to  God,  abiding  in  Christ,  and  feeding  upon  him. 
We  begin  with  an  examination  of  the  phrase 
"  born  "  or  "  begotten  from  God,"  or  "  from  above  " 
(^jevv7]6r]vai  e/c  Oeov,  e/c  rov  Oeov,  dvcodev'),  which  occurs 
eight  times  in  our  sources  (counting  the  whole  ]jassage 
iii.  3-8,  and  verses  in  which  the  word  is  repeated,  as 
furnishing  single  instances  of  its  use).  The  first  ex- 
ample of  the  employment  of  the  phrase  meets  us  in 
the  prologue  (i.  13)  where  a  contrast  is  drawn  between 
the  natural  and  the  spiritual  birth.  The  thought  is : 
The  Word  came  to  the  Jewish  people,  who  of  right 
belonged  to  him  by  reason  of  their  privileges  and 
training,  but  they  rejected  him  (verse  11).  He  then 
offered  himself  to  any  and  all  who  would  accept  him, 
and  opened  to  them  the  privilege  of  sonship  to  God 
(verse  12).  This  he  did  on  conditions  which  were 
purely  spiritual,  and  irrespective  of  natural  birthright 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE       243 

or  inheritance.  Not  descent  from  tlie  theocratic  peo- 
ple, but  acceptance  of  a  new  life  from  God,  was  his 
requirement.  The  nature  of  this  divine  impartation 
of  life  is  not  defined,  except  so  far  as  a  definition  of 
it  is  implied  in  its  contrast  to  natural  birth  or  descent, 
and  in  its  co-ordination  with  receiving  Christ  and 
believing  on  his  name  (verse  12). 

Attention  may  here  be  called  to  the  fact  that  the 
phrase  in  question  is  best  rendered  "  begotten  "  rather 
than  "  born  of  God  "  except  in  the  passage  iii.  3-8, 
where  the  thought  is  slightly  different.  The  A.  V. 
rendered  "  born  "  in  all  cases  except  in  I.  v.  1,  and  18. 
In  the  first  of  these  passages  the  active  participle 
(^ewqaavra)  occurs,  which  can  only  be  translated 
"  begat ; "  but  notwithstanding  this,  the  passive  forms 
{'yeyevvrjTai,  jeyevvrjixevov')  were  rendered  in  one  case 
"  born,"  and  in  the  other  "  begotten."  In  verse  18  two 
passive  participles  occur  (jeyevvr}ixevo<;  and  'yevvrjOei^), 
and  the  same  inconsistency  is  observed  in  the  render- 
ing of  the  A.  v.,  where  no  apparent  reason  diverted 
the  translators  from  their  favorite  rendering  ("  born  "), 
as  was  the  case  in  verse  1.  The  R.  V.  has  correctly 
translated  the  terms  by  "  begotten  "  in  all  cases  in  the 
First  Epistle,  but  in  i.  13  has  rendered  "  born  "  ("  be- 
gotten "  in  the  margin),  probably  in  view  of  the 
passage  iii.  3-8.  The  correct  translation  here  (i.  13) 
is  "  begotten,"  since  the  thought  relates  primarily  to 
the  first  origin  of  life,  and  not  to  a  change  in  the  sphere 
or  mode  of  life.  The  phrase  yewTjdrjvat  e/c  deov  in  this 
passage,  and  uniformly  in  the  First  Epistle,  refers  to 


244  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

the  initiation  of  spiritual  life  from  God,  to  a  divine 
begetting  or  impartation  of  life.  The  force  of  the 
phrase  is  amply  illustrated  in  the  First  Epistle. 

In  I.  ii.  29,  the  habitual  doing  of  righteousness  is 
said  to  be  the  test  which  determines  whether  or  not 
one  is  begotten  of  God :  "  If  3'e  know  that  he  [God]  is 
righteous,  ye  know  that  every  one  also  that  doeth  right- 
eousness (6  TTOLcov  TTjv  hiKaLoavvqv)  hath  been  begotten 
of  him  "  (e^  avrov  <ye^€vvrjTaC).  Likeness  of  character 
to  God  is  the  mark  of  those  to  whom  God  has  imparted 
his  own  life,  so  that  they  become  and  remain  his  sons 
(note  the  force  of  the  perfect  tense). ^  The  thought  is 
similar  in  I.  iii.  9 :  "  Every  one  that  has  been  begotten 
of  God  [and  that  remains  his  child  —  yeyewrj/ievo';'} 
does  not  do  sin  (afxapriav  ov  iroLeV),  because  his  seed 
abideth  in  him,"  —  the  new  germ  of  life  which  God 
has  imparted  to  him  remains  as  a  transforming  power 
in  his  life,  —  "  and  he  cannot  sin,"  that  is,  cannot  live 
the  sinful  life,  cannot  habitually  sin  {d/jiapTdveiv  is 
here  equivalent  to  iroidv  d/xapriav),  "  because  he  has 
been  begotten  of  God  "  (e'/c  rod  6eov  jejevvrjrai).  As 
in  the  two  passages  just  noticed,  the  doing  of  righteous- 
ness and  the  not  doing  of  sin  are  given  as  the  tests  of 
having  been  begotten  from  God,  so  in  iv,  7  love  is  pre- 

1  I  have  rendered  the  Greek  perfect  tense  in  all  cases  by  our 
English  perfect,  instead  of  by  the  present,  "  is  begotten  "  (R.  V.). 
This  tense  expresses  a  permanent  relation  begun  in  the  past  and 
continued  in  the  present.  The  present  tense  in  English  re- 
produces only  the  second  element  in  this  two-fold  force,  which 
our  perfect,  no  doubt,  fails  in  part  to  rei^resent. 


THE  NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL  LIFE     245 

sented  in  the  same  relation :  "  Beloved,  let  us  love 
one  another :  for  love  is  of  God ;  and  every  one  that 
loveth  hath  been  begotten  (yeyevvrjTai)  of  God,  and 
knoweth  God."  It  is  obvious  that  righteousness  and 
love  are  regarded  as  tests  of  the  divine  impartation  of 
life  because  they  are  its  consequences.  The  divine 
begetting  is  the  logical  prius  of  the  spiritual  life  and 
of  all  its  fruits.  This  relation  of  the  thoughts  is  made 
clear  in  I.  iii.  9,  and  is  particularly  emphasized  in  the 
conversation  of  Jesus  with  Nicodemus  (iii.  3-8). 

Still  another  test  of  the  divine  begetting  is  faith : 
"  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  hath 
been  begotten  of  God  :  and  whosoever  loveth  him  that 
begat  (jov  jevvrja-avra,  that  is,  God)  loveth  him  also 
that  hath  been  begotten  of  him  (God)  "  (I.  v.  1) :  He 
that  loves  God  who  bestows  spiritual  life,  loves  also 
the  child  of  God  upon  whom  he  has  bestowed  it ;  love 
to  God  involves  love  of  the  brethren.  Nothing  is  here 
intimated  as  to  the  logical  or  chronological  relation 
of  faith  to  the  divine  begetting ;  it  is  only  said  that 
every  one  who  believes  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ  has 
been  begotten  from  God  and  is  a  child  of  his.  Such 
faith  is  the  unfailing  mark  of  sonship  to  God.  An 
effect  of  the  possession  of  divine  life  is  stated,  in  an 
abstract  form,  in  I.  v.  4  :  "  Whatsoever  hath  been  be- 
gotten of  God  overcometh  the  world."  This  reminds 
one  of  the  statement  in  I.  iii.  9  that  the  divine  life- 
principle  brings  about  a  moral  impossibility  of  sinning. 
How  closely  the  begetting  from  God  and  faith  —  the 
divine  and  human  factors  in  salvation  —  are  co-ordi- 


246  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

nated  by  John  is  apparent  from  the  parallelism  of 
this  verse  (I.  v.  4),  where  to  the  statement  that  what 
is  born  of  God  overcomes  the  world,  he  adds  that  faith 
is  the  power  that  overcomes  the  world. 

The  final  passage  in  the  Epistle  (v.  18)  resembles 
in  general  iii.  9.  It  reads :  "  We  know  that  whoso- 
ever hath  been  begotten  of  God  (6  ye^evvrjfievo'i  €k  roD 
deoii)  sinneth  not ;  but  he  that  was  begotten  of  God 
(6  yevvTjdeh  e'/c  rov  Oeoii)  keepeth  him  (^rrjpel  avrov) 
and  the  evil  one  toucheth  him  not."  Considerable 
difficulty  besets  the  phrase  6  f^evvqOeh  e/c  rov  deov  Trjpei 
avTov  (or  eavTov).  Most  modern  editors  (Treg.,  Tisch., 
Alf.,  W.  &  H.,  R.  V.)  adopt  the  reading  avrov  (so  A^ 
B  Vulg.).  Some,  however,  support  the  reading  of  the 
Textus  Receptus,  kavrov  (so  K  A^  K  L).  If  kavrov 
be  read,  the  meaning  is  plain  :  He  that  was  born  of 
God  keeps  himself,  that  is,  maintains  his  proper  char- 
acter, as  a  Christian  {ef.  iii.  3;  1  Tim.  v.  22;  Jas.  i. 
27).  The  great  majority  of  interpreters  favor  this 
view  of  the  text  and  meaning,  notwithstanding  the 
contrary  verdict  of  the  textual  critics.^  Other  exe- 
getes,  however,  adopt  the  reading  avrov.^  In  that 
case,  6  yevvrjOei';  is  most  naturally  referred,  so  far  as 
grammatical  considerations  are  concerned,  to  Christ. 
Westcott  and  Plummer  adopt  this  supposition,  and 
regard  it  as  explaining  the  change  from  the  perfect 

1  See,  for  example,  the  Commentaries  of  Liicke,  Huther, 
Haupt,  Weiss,  and  Holtzmann.  The  same  view  of  the  meaning 
is  presented  in  our  King  James's  version. 

*  So  Alford,  Westcott,  Plummer. 


THE   NATURE  OF  THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE      247 

participle  (uniformly  used  by  John  in  application  to 
the  believer)  to  the  aorist.  The  theory  is  that 
jevvrjdei^  refers  to  a  past  fact,  or  a  "  timeless  rela« 
tion  "  (Plummer).  But  the  fact  that  John  never 
elsewhere  applies  the  verb  yewrjdrjvat  to  Christ  pre- 
sents a  great  difhculty  for  this  interpretation.  Alford, 
therefore,  though  adopting  the  reading  avrov,  holds 
that  6  jevvr]6ei<i  refers  to  the  same  person  as  6  yeyev- 
vTjiMevo^,  and  supposes  that  the  construction  is  broken 
after  the  word  yewrjBeL^,  and  that  the  immediate  sub- 
ject of  rrjpel  is  the  idea  or  fact  of  the  divine  begetting 
which  is  implied  in  6  'yevvrjdei^.  To  bring  out  this 
interpretation  the  sentence  may  be  rendered  :  "  But 
he  that  was  born  of  God, — the  divine  begetting 
keeps  him."  Weiss  says  that  if  avrov  is  read,  this  is 
the  correct  interpretation  of  the  sentence.^  On  this 
view  the  change  to  the  aorist  participle  is  explained 
as  marking  his  divine  birth  as  a  past  fact  which  sev- 
ered his  connection  with  the  prince  of  the  world  and 
with  evil  (Alford).  This  explanation  avoids  the  diffi- 
culties which  beset  that  of  Westcott,  but,  in  point  of 
grammar,  is  very  harsh  and  arbitrary.  All  things 
considered,  the  interpretation  seems  preferable  which 
rests  upon  the  reading  eavrov,  and  which  translates  : 
"  He  that  was  begotten  from  God  [the  Christian] 
keeps  himself,"  —  with  which  should  be  compared 
the  words  of  this  same  Epistle :  "  Every  one  that 
hath  this  hope    [of  seeing  Christ  as  he  is]   set  on 

^  The  Vulgate  embodies  this  explanation :  sed  generaiio  Dei 
conservat  eum. 


248  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

him  [Christ]  piirifieth  (^dyviX^c  kavrov),  even  as  he 
[Christ]  is  pure  "  (I.  iii.  3).  But  whichever  reading 
and  interpretation  be  adopted,  the  main  thought  is 
that  it  is  against  the  nature  of  the  new  life  to  con- 
tinue in  sin,  and  that-  the  Christian  is  to  be  kept  free 
from  Satan's  power. 

The  final  example  of  the  form  of  thought  under 
consideration  is  found  in  the  conversation  of  Jesus 
with  Nicodcmus  (iii.  3-8).  Here,  as  we  have  before 
intimated,  the  form  of  thought  seems  to  be  that  of 
birth  rather  than  of  begetting.  Jesus  speaks  rather 
of  a  transformation  than  of  an  origination  of  life. 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  anew  (dvcoOev),  he  cannot 
see  the  kingdom  of  God  "  (iii.  3).  For  our  purpose  it 
makes  no  essential  difference  whether  dvcodev  be  ren- 
dered "again"  (A.  V.),  "anew"  (R.  V.),  or  "from 
above"  (so  most  commentators).  In  any  case  the 
meaning  is  that  a  spiritual  renewal,  wrought  by  God, 
is  necessary  for  participation  in  the  divine  kingdom. 
After  the  incredulous  question  of  Nicodemus  as  to 
the  possibility  of  a  birth  in  addition  to  that  by  which 
we  enter  the  world,  Jesus  repeats  the  thought  in 
somewhat  different  terms  :  "  Except  a  man  be  born 
of  water  and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God.  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is 
flesh ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit. 
Marvel  not  that  I  said  unto  thee,  Ye  must  be  born 
anew  "  (verses  5-7).  Nicodemus  had  spoken  of  natural 
birth  as  the  only  one  that  was  conceivable.  Jesus  re- 
plies that  man  is  related  to  two  spheres,  the  natural 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL  LIFE      249 

and  the  spiritual ;  that  as  physical  birth  marks  the 
beginning  of  his  personal  natural  life,  so  a  spiritual 
birth  marks  the  beginning  of  the  higher  life  of  the 
spirit.  He  implies  that  as  great  a  change  in  man's 
disposition  and  character  is  involved  in  his  entering 
the  divine  kingdom  as  took  place  in  his  natural  life  at 
his  birth.  The  new  birth  is  a  spiritual  transforma- 
tion ;  it  is  an  entrance  into  a  new  world  of  motives, 
interests,  and  hopes.  This  spiritual  process  is,  he 
adds,  an  inscrutable  mystery,  like  the  movement  of  the 
wind,  whose  sound  is  heard,  but  whose  nature  and 
sources  none  can  trace. 

Such  is  the  general  import  of  the  conversation. 
The  principal  exegetical  difficulty  appears  in  connec- 
tion with  the  phrase  (verse  5),  "  born  of  water  and  the 
Spirit"  (e^  v8aTo<;  koI  TrvevfiaTO';').  Most  commen- 
tators, ancient  and  modern,  hold  that  there  is  in  the 
word  "  water  "  some  kind  of  a  reference  to  baptism. 
This  supposition  is  considerably  strengthened  by  the 
passage,  "  There  are  three  who  bear  witness,  —  the 
Spirit,  and  the  water,  and  the  blood  :  and  the  three 
agree  in  one  "  (1.  v.  8),  where  "  the  water"  is  most  nat- 
urally taken  as  referring  to  Christ's  baptism,  Weiss 
is  the  only  modern  interpreter  among  those  whom  I 
have  consulted,  who  supposes  that  "  water  "  is  here  con- 
templated only  symbolically  as  the  purifying  element 
which  takes  away  sin.  He  does  not  make  "  water  " 
and  "  spirit "  mean  the  same  thing  (as  Calvin  and 
Grotius  had  done,  on  the  supposition  of  a  hendiadys), 
but   regards   the   effective,   life-giving  power  of  the 


250  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Spirit  as  the  positive  counterpart  and  completion  of  the 
cleansing  symbolized  by  "  water."  But  if  a  reference 
to  baptism  be  assumed,  is  it  primarily  and  directly  to 
Christian  baptism  (so  De  Wette,  Meyer,  Holtzmann), 
or  to  the  baptism  of  John  ?  Many  scholars  adopt  the 
latter  view  (Tholuck,  Alford,  Westcott,  Plummer, 
Godet),  but  generally  hold  that  an  indirect  or  pro- 
phetic reference  to  Christian  baptism  is  also  veiled  in 
the  word.  Liicke  finds  the  force  of  the  thought  in  the 
phrase  e|  vBaro^,  not  in  the  outward  rite  of  baptism, 
but  in  its  idea  and  significance.  This  seems  to  me  to 
be  a  helpful  suggestion,  but  it  should  not  be  pushed 
so  far  as  to  exclude  the  objective  import  of  the  rite. 
Baptism  expresses  not  only  the  repentance  of  the  re- 
cipient, but  also  God's  promise  and  pledge  of  forgive- 
ness. Bearing  this  in  mind,  I  think  it  most  natural 
to  suppose  that  in  speaking  of  "  water  "  and  "  Spirit," 
Jesus  is  thinking  primarily  of  the  repentance-baptism 
(/SaTTTicryLia  fjieTavoiat,  Mk.  i.  4)  of  John,  and  of  the 
spiritual  cleansing  which  he  himself  effects.  The  two 
aspects  of  thought  expressed  in  "  water"  and  "  Spirit  " 
correspond  to  the  distinction  made  by  John  the  Bap- 
tist between  his  preparatory  work  and  the  positive 
renewal  of  men  which  Christ  should  accomplish  :  "  I 
baptized  you  with  water  {vBaTi) ;  but  he  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Spirit "  {irvevixan  a^lw,  Mk.  i.  8). 
"  Water  "  expresses  rather  the  preparatory  or  nega- 
tive aspect  of  the  renewal,  corresponding  to  baptism, 
which  is  a  sign  of  repentance  of  sin  and  of  divine  for- 
giveness ;  "  Spirit  "  expresses  the  positive  bestowment 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE      251 

of  a  new  life.  There  is  thus  a  natural  progress  of 
thought  in  passing  from  the  idea  of  birth  by  water  to 
that  of  birth  by  Spirit.  Although  in  speaking  to 
Nicodemus  Jesus  would  hardly  think  directly  of 
Christian  baptism,  the  distinct  and  yet  complementary 
significance  of  vScop  and  irvevfxa  is  in  principle  equally 
applicable  to  it.  We  think,  then,  that  the  sense  is, 
substantially,  this:  Repentance  and  forgiveness  (ex- 
pressed in  baptism)  and  the  bestowment  of  a  new 
life  from  God  are  essential  to  participation  in  his 
kingdom. 

Those  who  have  been  begotten  from  God,  or  born 
anew,  are  children  of  God.  That  to  believe,  to  be 
begotten  of  God,  and  to  be  a  child  of  God,  are  kin- 
dred and  inseparable  ideas  is  clearly  shown  by  the 
passage,  "As  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave 
he  the  right  {i^ova-iav)  to  become  children  of  God, 
even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name  ;  which  were 
born  (or  begotten),  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of 
the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God  "  (i.  12, 
13).  The  complete  co-ordination  of  receiving  Christ, 
believing  on  Christ,  and  being  begotten  of  God  shows 
that  faith  is  not  here  contemplated  merely  as  a  con- 
dition precedent  of  becoming  a  son  of  God  (as  Weiss 
insists).  To  believe,  and  to  be  begotten  of  God  are 
two  inseparable  aspects  of  the  same  event  or  process 
(I.  V.  1),  and  in  being  begotten  of  God  one  becomes 
a  child  of  God;  equally,  therefore,  does  he  become 
such  in  the  very  act  of  believing.  Faith,  therefore, 
does  not  merely  make  sonship  to  God  possible ;  it  is 


252       THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY. 

the  actual  entrance  into  the  relation  of  sonship  so 
far  as  man  has  to  do  with  constituting  that  relation. 
Weiss  stands  alone,  so  far  as  I  know,  among  critical 
interpreters  in  sharply  separating  off  from  one  another 
the  various  phases  and  stages  of  the  work  of  salva- 
tion which  John  designates  by  the  different  words 
or  phrases  which  we  have  quoted.  His  version  of 
the  passage  just  cited  is  :  "  To  those  who  accept  him 
by  faith,  Christ  has  given  not  sonsliip  itself,  but  the 
power  to  become  the  sons  of  God  ;  the  last  and  high- 
est realization  of  this  ideal,  a  realization  for  the 
present  fathomless,  lies  only  in  the  future  consum- 
mation." ^  But  the  word  i^ovaia  here  is  best  taken, 
not  as  referring  to  a  mere  future  possihility  which 
faith  opens,  but  as  emphasizing  the  loftiness  of  the 
privilege  of  becoming  sons  of  God  which  is  accorded  to 
believers.2  The  arbitrary  analysis  of  Weiss  involves 
his  whole  discussion  of  this  and  allied  subjects  in  a 
maze  of  refinements,  which  illustrate,  not  the  apostle's 
method  of  religious  thought,  but  an  over-subtle  qual- 
ity of  some  modern  minds  which  the  Germans  them- 
selves aptly  designate  as  "  Spitzfindigkeit." 

It  may  be  well  to  notice  here  again  what  we  have 
observed  in  another  connection,  that  John  always 
speaks  of  rmva  rov  6eov,  not  of  viol  rov  Oeov.  Weiss 
suggests  that  John  may  have  chosen  the  word  reKva 
"  so  as  not  to  seem  to  approach  too  near  "  (in  the  lan- 
guage which  he  applies  to  Christians)  "the  peerless 

1  Bibl.  Theol.  §  150,  d. 

2  So  Beyschlag,  Neutest.  Theol,  ii.  4.53, 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE     253 

position  of  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,"  ^  A  more 
satisfactory  motive  for  the  choice  of  this  word  may 
be  found  in  John's  mode  of  religious  thought.  The 
term  reKvov  suggests  the  personal  and  intimate  rela- 
tions which  are  involved  in  sonship  rather  than  the 
legal  standing  and  privileges  which  Paul's  favorite 
word  uioV  expresses.  The  force  of  reKvov,  as  used  by 
the  apostle,  and  the  distinction  between  it  and  vi6<i, 
are  thus  stated  by  Bishop  Westcott :  "  The  idea  of 
TeKvov,  as  it  is  thus  presented  by  St.  John,  includes 
the  two  notions  of  the  presence  of  the  divine  prin-  ' 
ciple  and  the  action  of  human  growth.  The  child  is  ,* 
made  to  share  in  his  Father's  nature,  and  he  uses  j/\ 
in  progressive  advance  the  powers  which  he  has 
received.  It  is  therefore  easily  intelligible  why  St. 
John  never  uses  the  title  y/o?,  the  name  of  definite 
dignity  and  privilege,  to  describe  the  relation  of 
Christians  to  God.  He  regards  their  position  not 
as  the  result  of  an  '  adoption '  (vlodeaLa),  but  as  the 
result  of  a  new  life  which  advances  from  the  vital 
germ  to  full  maturity."  ^ 

The  way  in  which  John  associates  the  idea  of  child- 
ship  with  relations  of  loving  fellowship  between  man 
and  God  may  be  easily  seen  from  the  First  Epistle. 
"  Behold  what  manner  of  love  the  Father  hath  be- 
stowed upon  us,  that  we  should  be  called  children  of 
God  "  (Jva  reicva  deov  K\r]0ct)(jLev  —  should  bear  a  title 

1  Bibl.  Theol.  §  150,  d. 

^  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  additional  note  on  L  iii.  1,  pp. 
123,  124. 


254  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

of  such  honor  and  dignity)  :  "  and  such  we  are  "  {Kal 
iafjuev):  We  not  only  bear  the  name  of  children  of 
God,  but  we  are  in  reality  that  which  the  name  im- 
ports. "  Beloved,  noAv  are  we  children  of  God,"  etc. 
(I.  iii.  1,  2).  It  is  the  purpose  (iva)  of  God's  love 
to  secure  to  us  the  high  privilege  of  sonship,  and 
this  privilege  is  not  a  mere  possibility  or  prospect, 
but  a  present  possession:  koI  iajxev  vvv  reKva  deov 
iafiev. 

Not  only  is  a  loving  relation  to  God  involved  in 
childship  to  him ;  loving  fellowship  among  men  is 
equally  involved  in  it.  The  test  of  childship  to  God 
is  the  doing  of  righteousness  and  the  loving  of  one's 
brother,  that  is,  fellow-Christian  (I.  iii.  10).  Both 
the  relations  of  love  which  we  have  just  mentioned  — 
that  to  God  and  that  to  man  —  are  emphasized  to- 
gether in  I.  V.  1,  2 :  "  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ  is  begotten  of  God :  and  whosoever 
loveth  him  that  l)egat  [God]  loveth  him  also  that  is 
begotten  of  him  [the  Christian  brother].  Hereby  we 
know  that  we  love  the  children  of  God,  when  we  love 
God,  and  do  his  commandments."  These  examples 
show  that  with  John  sonship  to  God  is  a  personal 
relation  of  obedience  and  love,  involving  mutual 
devotion  among  all  who  share  this  relation.  They 
illustrate  his  spiritual  mode  of  viewing  the  nature 
and  obligations  of  religion.  These  relations  are 
viewed  quite  simply,  and  are  described  under  natural 
analogies  which  widely  remove  them  from  all  sug- 
gestions of  legal  processes  or  of  an  extended  ordo  sa- 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE     255 

lutis.  It  may  be  observed  in  passing  that  they  also 
confirm  the  view  taken  in  an  earlier  chapter  in  re- 
gard to  the  question  whether  or  not  in  John  all 
men  are  regarded  as  sons  of  God  (pp.  70-73). 

A  passage  of  great  interest  in  its  bearing  upon 
our  theme  is  found  in  the  speech  of  Caiaphas  before 
the  Sanhedrin  (xi.  49-52).  He  declared  that  it  was 
expedient  that  Jesus  should  die,  not  for  the  (Jewish) 
nation  only,  but  "  that  he  might  also  gather  together 
into  one  the  children  of  God  that  are  scattered 
abroad  "  (verse  52).  The  contrast  between  ra  reKva 
Tov  Oeov  and  "  the  [Jewish]  nation "  shows  that  by 
the  former  certain  Gentiles  are  meant.  It  must  not 
be  forgotten  that  it  is  here  the  high  priest,  and  not 
the  evangelist,  who  is  speaking  and  giving  his  phil- 
osophy of  vicarious  sacrifice,  —  in  certain  respects  a 
false  and  perverse  one.  Still,  the  apostle  gives  the 
opinion  of  Caiaphas  as  expressing  certain  truths 
which  lay  beneath  the  speaker's  immediate,  conscious 
meaning.  We  may  then  regard  the  idea  that  there 
were  "  cliildren  of  God "  outside  Judaism  as  true  to 
John's  mind,  especially  if  it  be  involved  in  other 
passages.  The  question  arises,  How  are  we  to  con- 
ceive and  define  this  idea  ?  Hilgenfeld  understands 
the  words  to  refer,  in  a  dualistic  sense,  to  a  natural 
sonship  of  some  men  to  God,  in  contrast  to  others 
who  are  children  of  the  devil.i  This  opinion  is 
connected  with  the  theory  of  the  Tiibingen  school 
respecting  the  origin   and  character  of   the  Fourth 

1  Das  Evangelium  tmil  die  Briefe  Johannes,  p.  297  sq. 


256  THE  JOHANNTNE  THEOLOGY 

Gospel  as  a  specimen  of  Gnostic  speculation  applied 
to  Christianity.  Most  interpreters  hold  either  that 
some  Gentiles  are  spoken  of  as  "  children  of  God " 
b}'  anticipation,  as  being  such  in  the  purpose  of  God 
(Calvin,  Luther,  Meyer,  Holtzmann),  or  that  they  are 
so  described  because  they  have  an  incipient  faith, 
a  susceptibility  or  predisposition,  which  would  lead 
them  to  accept  the  truth  and  work  of  Christ  when 
the  knowledge  of  it  should  be  brought  to  them  (so, 
substantially,  Liicke,  Weiss,  Godet,  Westcott).  This 
is  the  preferable  view.  These  scattered  believers 
among  the  heathen  are  already  children  of  God,  not, 
indeed,  naturally,  but  by  the  grace  of  God  which 
manifests  itself  wherever  there  is  a  receptivity  for  it. 
Jesus  recognizes  in  men  different  degrees  of  recep- 
tiveness  for  his  truth.  He  says  to  a  certain  company 
of  Jews  :  "  He  that  is  of  God  "  —  he  that  has  the  dis- 
position and  desire  of  obedience  —  "  heareth  the  words 
of  God :  for  this  cause  ye  hear  them  not,  because  ye 
are  not  of  God  "  (viii.  47).  We  hold,  therefore,  that 
these  Gentile  "  children  of  God "  are  the  "  other 
sheep  {aWa  irpo^ara)  which  are  not  derived  from 
(e/c)  this  [Jewish]  fold  "  which  he  would  bring  ^  (d7a- 
7eiz/),  that  all  his  sheep  may  together  constitute  one 
flock  under  the  one  Shepherd  (x.  16).     It  does  not 

1  Many  interpreters  (as  Meyer,  Weiss,  Westcott,  Plummer) 
render  ayayfiv  to  lead,  and  do  not  find  the  idea  of  bringing  to- 
gether the  scattered  sheep,  either  to  himself  or  into  one  flock, 
contained  in  our  passage  (/>er  contra,  Tholuck,  Luthardt, 
Godet).  This  question  does  not  essentially  concern  our  pres- 
ent use  of  the  passage. 


THE  NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL  LIFE    257 

seem  natural  (with  Meyer  and  others)  to  take  the 
words  "  Other  sheep  I  have "  as  prophetic,  espe- 
cially in  view  of  the  statements  of  the  prologue  that 
the  life  of  the  Logos  "  was  the  light  of  men  "  (i.  4), 
"the  true  light  which  lighteth  every  man,  coming 
into  the  world  "  (o  (fxort^et  irdvTa  avOpcoTrov  ip')(oiA,evov 
ek  TOP  Koafjbov,  i.  9).  Whichever  of  three  possible 
constructions  ^  be  adopted  for  the  participle  ep'xpfxevov 
here,  the  passage  asserts  the  universality  of  revela- 
tion through  the  Logos  ;  nor  does  it  merely  assert 
that  the  Logos  enlightens  all  men  in  general  (TrdvTa<i 
avdpQiTTov';'),  but  that  he  lighteth  every  individual  man 
(jrdvTa  dvOpwiTov').  If  God  reveals  himself  to  each 
man  in  some  way  and  measure  and  touches  men  uni- 
versally with  the  influences  of  his  grace,  it  is  cer- 
tainly conceivable  that  there  should  be  at  all  times 
and  in  all  nations  those  who  —  notwithstanding  the 
limitations  of  their  hght  and  knowledge — may,  by 
reason  of  their  disposition  and  susceptibility,  be  truly 
called  "  children  of  God  "  and  members  of  Christ's 
true  flock.     In  this  view  sonship  to  God  does  not  rest 

^  ^Epxoiievov  may  be  construed  (1)  with  ^v  at  the  beginning 
of  the  sentence,  making  a  periphrastic  form :  Tire  true  light 
which  lighteth  every  man  was  coming  (or  came)  into  the  world 
(so  Lticke,  DeWette,  Weiss,  Godet,  Westcott,  R.  V.  marg.) ;  or 
(2)  with  the  relative  o :  There  was  the  true  light  which,  by  (or 
on)  coming  into  the  world,  lighteth  every  man  (so  Luther's 
first  ed.,  "  durcli  seine  Zukunft,"  u.  s.  w.)  ;  or  (3)  with  avdpa>iTov  : 
which  lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  (or  as  he  cometh)  into 
the  world  (so  most  of  the  Fathers  and  Reformers,  Vulg.,  A.  V., 
Meyer,  Plummer,  Dwight).  A  majority  of  modern  exegetes 
adopt  the  first  construction. 

17 


258  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

upon  a  basis  of  nature  oi*  of  desert :  it  rests  upon 
divine  grace  alone,  but  upon  a  grace  which  is  not 
restricted,  but  world-wide  in  its  operation. 

The  nature  of  the  Christian  life  is  further  exhibited 
by  the  use  of  a  considerable  variety  of  descriptive 
phrases,  the  most  important  of  which  are,  abiding  or 
being  in  Christ  (or  in  God),  the  dwelling  of  Christ 
(or  of  God)  in  the  believer,  —  both  forms  of  expres- 
sion are  sometimes  combined,  —  fellowship  with  Christ 
(or  with  God),  and  eating  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of 
Man  and  drinking  his  blood. ^  What  the  significance 
and  consequences  of  this  "  abiding  "  are  may  best  be 
determined  by  a  careful  observation  of  the  connec- 
tions of  thought  in  which  the  expression  occurs.  The 
test  of  abiding  in  Christ  is  said  to  be  obedience  to 
his  commandments  and  the  following  of  his  example : 
"  Hereby  know  we  that  we  are  in  him :  he  that  saith 
he  abideth  in  him  ought  himself  also  to  walk  even  as 
he  (Christ)  walked  "  (I.  ii.  5,  6).  Again,  the  holding 
fast  of  the  truths  which  were  first  taught  his  Christ- 
ian readers  is  urged  by  the  apostle  as  the  condition 
of  abiding  in  the  Son  and  in  the  Father  (I.  ii.  24). 
This  verse  has  been  paraphrased  thus :  "  Let  the 
truths  which  were  first  taught  you  have  a  home  in 
your  hearts  :  if  these  have  a  home  in  you,  ye  also 
shall  have  a  home  in  the  Son  and  in  the  Father" 
(Plummer).  In  verses  27  and  28  the  abiding  of  the 
believer  in  Christ  is  closely  associated  (not  strictly 

^  The  passages  are  tabulated  in  Westcott's  Epistles  of  St. 
John,  pp.  174,  175. 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE     259 

identified)  with  the  "  anointing  "  (%/9to-/xa)  which  the 
Christian  has  received,  that  is,  with  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  .  This  chrism  is  personified  and  repre- 
sented as  abiding  in  the  Christian  and  teaching  him, 
—  a  work  which  seems  to  be  thought  of  as  a  condi- 
tion or  preparation  for  his  abiding  in  Christ.  These 
verses  appear  to  be  explained  by  I.  iv.  13 :  "  Hereby 
know  we  that  we  abide  in  him,  and  he  in  us,  because 
he  hath  given  us  of  his  Spirit."  Another  clear  note 
respecting  the  meaning  of  abiding  in  Christ  is  struck 
in  I.  iii.  6 :  "  Whosoever  abideth  in  him  sinneth  not 
{ovx  dfiaprdvei  —  does  not  live  the  sinful  life)  :  whoso- 
ever sinneth  (Tra?  o  dfjiaprdvoov  —  every  one  wlio  lives 
tlie  life  of  habitual  sin)  hath  not  seen  him,  neither 
knoweth  him." 

From  these  passages  it  appears  that  to  abide  in 
Christ  (or  in  God)  is  to  forsake  the  sinful  life,  to 
keep  his  words  and  to  exemplify  his  spirit.  In  short, 
it  is  to  live  the  life  of  love :  "  God  is  love ;  and  he 
that  abideth  in  love  abideth  in  God,  and  God  abidetli 
in  him  "  (I.  iv.  16).  But  the  further  question  arises, 
whether  a  personal,  mystical  relation  is  also  involved 
in  this  and  kindred  expressions.  It  seems  difficult  to 
doubt  that  this  is  the  case  when  one  reads  the  alle- 
gory of  the  Vine  and  the  Branches  (xv.  1-6).  Even 
Weiss,  who  seeks  to  exclude  all  mysticism  from  the 
Johannine  idea  of  faith,  admits  that  "  abiding "  in 
Christ  implies  a  "mystical  union,  a  oneness  of  person 
with  him."  ^      The  allegory  depicts  the  necessity  of 

1  Btbl.  Theol.  §  149,  d,  note  12. 


260  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

un  organic  and  vital  union  between  the  believer  and 
Christ.  To  abide  in  him  (verse  4)  is  equivalent  to 
bearing  a  relation  to  him  analogous  to  that  of  the 
branch  to  the  vine  (verse  2)  from  which  it  draws  its 
life.  Such  a  union  is  the  condition  of  all  fruitfulness 
(verses  4,  5).  Apart  from  him  the  disciple  can  do 
nothing,  that  is,  can  bear  no  fruit  of  Christlike  love 
and  service.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  thought  passes 
directly  from  the  figure  of  the  vine  to  that  of  loving 
fellowship  between  him  and  his  disciples :  "  Even  as 
the  Father  hath  loved  me,  I  also  have  loved  you : 
abide  ye  in  my  love"  (verse  9).  The  fundamental 
idea  of  the  allegory  is  that  of  the  close,  constant, 
loving  fellowship  of  life  between  the  believer  and  his 
Lord. 

This  fellowship  of  the  believer  with  Christ  involves 
fellowship  with  the  Father  and  the  indwelling  of  Christ 
and  of  God  in  the  Christian  man.  "  Our  fellowship 
is  with  the  Father,  and  with  his  Son  Jesus  Christ" 
(I.  i.  3).  He  who  keeps  God's  commandments  abides 
in  God,  and  God  in  him  (1.  iii.  24).  God  abides  in 
those  who  love  one  another  (I.  iv.  12).  A  reciprocal 
abiding  of  the  believer  in  Christ,  and  of  Christ  in  him, 
is  more  than  once  mentioned  (xiv.  20  ;  xv.  5) ;  and  the 
possible  closeness  of  this  union  is  emphasized  by  its 
being  compared  to  that  which  subsists  between  the 
Son  and  the  Father :  "  And  the  glory  which  thou 
hast  given  me  I  have  given  unto  them ;  that  they 
may  be  one,  even  as  we  are  one ;  I  in  them,  and  thou 
in  me,  that  they  may  be  perfected  into  one ;  that  the 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE    SPIRITUAL   LIFE      261 

world  may  know  that  thou  didst  send  nic,  and  lovcdst 
them,  even  as  thou  lovedst  me  "  (xvii.  22,  23). 

Wo  have  ah-cady  had  oecasion,  in  treating  of  the 
Johannine  doctrine  of  salvation,  to  consider  the  three 
principal  interpretations  of  tlie  expressions  eating  the 
flesh,  and  drinking  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  man 
(vi.  52-59 ;  see  pp.  159-164).  In  the  view  which  we 
adopted  these  phrases  are  descriptive  of  the  living 
appropriation  of  Christ  to  the  heart.  "Flesh"  and 
"  blood  "  stand  as  symbols  of  his  very  self.  To  par- 
take of  these  is  spiritually  to  approi)riate  Christ  by 
an  intimate  life-union  with  him.  This  conception  of 
his  meaning  is  the  most  comprehensive  one.  It  does 
not  wholly  exclude  the  ideas  which  are  derived  from 
them  by  other  explanations,  but,  in  a  measure,  includes 
them.  The  appropriation  of  Christ,  in  the  fullest 
sense  of  the  word,  includes  the  believing  acceptance 
of  the  benefits  of  his  sacrificial  work  which  are  per- 
petually symbolized  and  attested  in  the  Lord's  sup- 
per. Christ  is  himself,  in  his  whole  person,  work, 
and  spirit,  the  bread  of  life ;  and  to  eat  his  flesh  and 
drink  his  blood  is  the  same  as  to  feed  upon  that  living 
bread  of  God  which  came  down  out  of  heaven  (verses 
57,  58) ;  it  is  to  live  "  because  of  him  ;  "  it  is  to  strike 
the  roots  of  one's  life  into  Christ. 

This  review  of  the  passages  which  illustrate  the 
nature  of  the  relation  which  the  Christian  sustains  to 
the  source  of  his  spiritual  life,  may  fitly  close  with  a 
notice  of  a  passage  which  is  a  complex  of  the  religious 
ideas  found  in  the  writings  of  John :    "  Yet  a  littlo 


262  THE  JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

while,  and  the  world  bcholdeth  me  no  more ;  but  ye 
behold  me :  because  I  live,  yc  shall  live  also.^  In 
that  day  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  in  my  Father,  and 
ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you"  (xiv.  19,  20).  Jesus  had 
just  been  speaking  of  his  coming  to  them  through  the 
presence  of  the  Spirit  (verse  18),  and  now  adds  that 
soon  his  bodily  form  —  which  is  all  that  the  w^orld 
can  see  of  him  —  will  be  withdrawn  from  human 
sight ;  the  literal,  physical  beholding  of  him  w^ill  be 
no  longer  possible,  but  his  disciples  will  continue  to 
behold  him  with  the  eye  of  the  spirit ;  he  will  still 
seem  real  and  present  to  them  through  the  spiritual 
perception  which  they  have  of  him.  When  the  senses 
can  no  longer  discern  him  he  will  still  disclose  him- 
self to  the  mystic  vision  of  the  soul.  To  this  concep- 
tion is  added  that  of  living  through  his  life.  Re- 
moved though  he  will  be  from  the  world's  natural 
sight,  his  life  will  not  be  quenched.  He  will  live  on 
and  work  on  in  unseen,  unknown  ways  in  the  world 
of  the  Spirit.  Because  his  life  and  power  are  change- 
less and  eternal  he  will  continue  to  be  the  source  of 
spiritual  life  to  all  who  look  to  him.  Such  words 
carry  the  mind  beyond  the  realm  of  time  and  sense 

^  Many  scholars  (so  Meyer  and  Weiss ;  per  contra,  Godet  and 
Westcott)  would  translate  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  thus : 
"but  ye  behold  me  because  I  live  and  (because)  ye  shall 
live,"  making  the  two  assertions  "I  live  "  and  "ye  shall  live  " 
assign  the  reason  for  the  statement  "ye  behold  me,"  instead  of 
treating  them  as  together  constituting  an  independent  proposi- 
tion. The  rendering  of  our  English  versions  appears  to  me  to 
give  the  more  forcible  sense. 


THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SPIRITUAL  LIFE    263 

into  the  world  of  eternal  reality.  To  this  world 
Christ  belongs,  —  in  it  he  lives  and  works ;  into  that 
world  the  eye  of  faith  pierces,  and  up  to  its  heavenly 
heights  of  holy  peace  and  calm  he  lifts  those  who  join 
their  lives  to  him. 

But  even  in  this  region  of  transcendent  mystery 
the  mind  is  not  "  in  wandering  mazes  lost."  Thought 
is  still  held  captive  by  the  sense  of  those  personal 
relations  which  lie  at  the  basis  of  all  religious  life  and 
experience.  "In  that  day  ye  shall  know  that  I  am 
in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you "  (xiv. 
20).  The  spiritual  vision  of  Christ,  and  spiritual  life 
through  his  life,  shall  but  make  more  clear  and  certain 
his  own  perfect  union  with  the  Father,  and  the  mutual 
fellowship  of  his  disciples  and  himself.  And  what 
is  the  bond  of  this  union  ?  Love  (verses  21,  22). 
These  high,  mystic  terms  —  beholding,  living,  indwell- 
ing—  are  at  once  translated  into  that  practical  but 
all-embracing  principle  of  love.  He  who  loves  and 
obeys  me,  he  it  is  to  whom  the  vision  of  God  comes. 
Our  passage,  therefore,  forms  a  fitting  transition  to 
the  special  study  of  the  idea  of  love  in  our  sources. 
But  before  passing  on  to  the  consideration  of  that 
subject,  let  us  cast  a  glance  backward  over  the  relig- 
ious conceptions  which  we  have  just  reviewed,  and 
seek  to  make  some  practical  estimate  of  their  import. 

In  the  first  place,  the  ideas  which  we  have  been  con- 
sidering illustrate  what  I  may  call  an  intensely  religious 
view  of  Christianity.  I  mean  that  they  all  rest  upon 
the  supposition  that  God  is  very  neai  us,  and  that  the 


264  THE  JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

forces  of  the  spiritual  and  eternal  order  constantly 
penetrate  our  world.  Religion  is  a  very  personal  affair. 
It  is  not  depicted  as  consisting  in  the  performance  of 
sacred  rites,  or  even  in  the  doing  of  specific  duties.  It 
is  rather  a  relation  of  fellowship  with  God  as  revealed 
in  Christ,  and  therefore  a  relation  of  likeness  to  him. 
The  religious  life  is  not  a  play  of  feeling  within  our- 
selves ;  it  is  not  a  mere  collection  of  good  deeds  and 
virtues  which  we  have  achieved  ;  it  is  a  divine  im- 
partation  from  God ;  it  is  the  response  of  the  human 
spirit  to  the  life-giving  touch  of  the  Father  of  our 
spirits.  The  descriptions  of  Christian  life  and  expe- 
rience which  we  have  studied  assume  that  religion 
is  the  divine  life  in  man  ;  that  the  world  of  religious 
thought  and  feeling  is  a  world  of  realities,  and  not 
of  phantoms. 

Again,  the  Johannine  conception  of  religion  is  es- 
pecially favorable  to  devotion.  It  appeals  powerfully 
to  the  imagination  and  the  heart ;  it  keeps  alive  the 
sense  of  a  real  and  present  Saviour ;  it  fills  life,  not 
merely  with  hopes  of  a  future  blessedness,  but  with 
a  present  fulness  of  joy  and  richness  of  experience. 
No  New  Testament  writer  has  so  vividly  conceived 
the  powers  of  the  heavenly  world  as  operative  here 
and  now,  as  the  apostle  John.  If,  as  his  legend  de- 
scribes, he  has  soared  into  the  sun,  he  has  brought 
down  into  our  sinful  world  and  common  life  some- 
thing of  the  warmth  and  glory  of  the  everlasting 
Light.  Eternal  life  is  already  here ;  the  world  of 
time  and  sense  is  swallowed  up  in  the  world  of  the 


THE   NATURE   OF   THE   SPIRITUAL   LIFE     265 

Spirit;  and  life  is  transfigured  by  the  presence   and 
the  love  of  God. 

Our  author's  religious  ideas  are  also  very  practical. 
Religion  is  character.  "  He  that  doeth  righteousness 
is  righteous,  even  as  he  [Christ]  is  righteous  "  (I.  iii. 
7).  Christ  has  interpreted  the  nature  of  God  to  man; 
his  life  is  therefore  the  true  norm  of  character. 
Likeness  to  him  is  the  all-comprehending  require- 
ment of  religion.  To  be  like  God  in  love,  in  sym- 
pathy, in  helpfulness,  is  the  sum  of  every  Christian 
obligation.  All  duties  repose  upon  this  deep  founda- 
tion. This  is  the  reason  for  living  the  Christian  life 
upon  which  all  other  reasons  rest.  Any  conception 
of  religion  must  involve  a  high  standard  of  character 
which  presents,  as  John's  does,  a  pure  and  spiritual 
idea  of  God,  and  then  defines  the  religious  life  to  be 
a  fellowship  and  affinity  of  spirit  with  him.  We  may 
sum  the  matter  up  by  saying  that,  while  there  is 
little  in  the  Gospel  and  First  Epistle  of  John  which 
is  adapted  to  prolnote  the  strifes  of  sect  and  the  dis- 
putes of  theological  parties,  these  writings  remain 
what  they  have  ever  been  since  their  composition 
and  will  probably  be  to  the  end  of  time,  —  the  two 
incomparable  manuals  of  religion,  matchless  por- 
trayals of  the  richness,  beauty,  and  blessedness  of 
the  spiritual  life. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE   DOCTRINE   OF  LOVE 

Literature.  — Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol,  Of  Love,ii.  482-491 
(orig.  ii.  538-549);  Westcott  :  Epistles  of  St.  John,  The  Idea  of 
Love,  pp.  130-133 ;  Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Die  Liebe, 
ii.  459-462 ;  Baur  :  Neutest.  Theol,  Die  Liebe  des  Vaters  zum 
Sohn  und  Gottes  zur  Welt,  pp.  397-400  ;  Wendt  :  Teaching  oj 
Jesus,  Admonition  to  love  in  the  Johannine  fai-ewell  discourse, 
i.  357-362  (orig.  pp.  287-292)  ;  Messner  :  Lehre  der  Apostel, 
Die  Liebe,  pp.  351-354 ;  W  G.  Ballentine  :  Art.  "  Lovest  Thou 
me  ?  "  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  July,  1889,  pp.  524-542  ;  E.  A. 
Park  :  Sermon  on  "  God  is  love,"  in  his  Discourses,  pp.  155-180. 

The  principal  passages  which  ilkistrate  the  idea  of 
love  as  presented  in  our  sources,  are  very  familiar,  and 
to  a  considerable  extent  have  been  already  quoted. 
The  passages  have  been  fully  tabulated  by  Westcott.^ 
It  will  be  sufficient  for  our  purpose  to  give  a  brief 
resume  of  his  grouping.  The  passages  are  distributed 
into  classes  witli  reference  to  two  points  :  (1)  the  term 
which  is  used  to  express  the  idea  of  love,  and  (2)  the 
subject  and  object  of  the  love  that  is  predicated. 

Two  verbs  meaning  to  love  are  frequently  used  in 
John's  writings,  ayaTrdv  and  (fjtXeiv.     The  noun  ayaTrrj, 

1  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  pp.  130-133. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  267 

corresponding  to  a'^airav^  also  occurs  frequently,  but 
(jiiXia,  which  would  correspond  to  (f>i\€Lv,  is  not  found.^ 
The  proper  difference  between  these  two  verbs  has 
been  frequently  defined  by  scholars  with  great  care. 
I  can  therefore  do  the  reader  no  better  service  than 
to  quote  two  or  three  of  these  definitions.  "  'Ayairdv 
properly  denotes  a  love  founded  in  admiration,  vener- 
ation, esteem,  like  the  Latin  diligere,  to  be  Icindly  dis- 
posed to  one,  to  wish  one  well ;  but  ^tkeiv  denotes  an 
inclination  prompted  by  sense  and  emotion,  Latin, 
amare ;  ut  scires,  eum  a  me  non  diligi  solum,  verum 
etiam  amari  (Cicero).'"'^ 

"  ^iXelv  denotes  the  love  of  natural  inclination, 
affection, — love,  so  to  say,  originally  spontaneous, 
involuntary ;  ar^airav,  on  the  other  hand,  love  as  a 
direction  of  the  will.  .  .  .  The  range  of  <^i\elv  is  wider 
than  that  of  a'^airav,  but  a<^airav  stands  all  the  higher 
above  ^Ckdv  on  account  of  its  moral  import.  It  docs 
not  in  itself  exclude  affection,  but  it  is  always  the 
moral  affection  of  conscious  deliberate  will  which  is 
contained  in  it,  not  the  natural  impulse  of  immediate 
feeling."  3 

"  <^i\dv  {amare)  denotes  a  passionate,  emotional 
warmth,  which  loves  and  docs  not  care  to  ask  why ; 
the  affection  which  is  based  on  natural  relationship,  as 
of  parents,  brothers,  etc.     ^Aryairdv  {diligei-e)  denotes 

^  This  word  occiu'S  in  the  New  Testament  only  once,  —  James 
iv.  4,  "the  friendship  ((fyikia)  of  the  world." 
2  Thayer's  Lexicon,  sub  voce,  <j)ikeco. 
Cremer,  Biblico-Theological  Lexicon,  sub  voce,  ayairao). 


268  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

a  calm,  discriminating  attachment,  which  loves  be- 
cause of  the  excellence  of  the  loved  object;  the  affec- 
tion which  is  based  on  esteem,  as  of  friends.  ^tXelv 
is  the  stronger,  but  less  reasoning ;  ayuTrdv  the  more 
earnest,  but  less  intense."  ^ 

It  is  evident,  if  these  definitions  are  correct,  that 
ayuTrdv  is  the  word  of  loftier  meaning ;  it  is  the  woi-d 
which  expresses  the  ideas  of  choice,  esteem,  reverence, 
and  the  like,  while  ^iXelv  designates  rather  those 
natural  or  friendly  relations  which  spring  from  the 
affections.  Accordingly,  love  to  God  is  always  denoted 
in  the  New  Testament  hj'  dr^airdv,  and  the  noun  for 
love  in  the  religious  sense  is  always  aridiTT).  Men  are 
commanded  to  love  their  enemies  with  the  love  of 
benevolence  or  the  love  that  seeks  their  true  good 
{ar^aTrdv),  not  with  the  love  of  complacency  or  per- 
sonal affection  and  attachment  (<^Ckelv).  It  would, 
indeed,  be  incongruous  to  command  love  in  the  sense 
of  <^L\elv^  but  not  in  the  sense  of  d<yaTrdv.  From  such 
examples  of  the  usage  it  appears  that  a'^airdv  relates 
rather  to  the  judgment  or  the  will ;  cfjcXelv  rather  to 
the  emotional  or  sensuous  nature. 

In  general  these  distinctions  seem  applicable  in 
John.  'AryaTrdv  is  many  times  predicated  of  the  love 
of  the  Father  to  the  Son,  e.  ff.,  "  The  Father  loveth 
{djaira)  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things  into  his 
hand  "  (iii.  35,  cf.  x.  17  ;  xv.  9 ;  xvii.  23-26).  It  is 
once  used  of  the  love  of  God  to  the  world :  "  God  so 
loved  {'^jdir'qaev)  the  world  "  etc.  (iii.  16),  and  several 

^  Plummer,  Commentary,  on  xi.  5. 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  269 

times  of  his  love  to  men  (xiv.  21,  23  ;  xvii.  23  ;  I.  iv. 
10,  11).  Once  (jiiXelv  is  used  to  designate  the  love  of 
the  Father  to  the  Son:  "For  the  Father  loveth 
(<j)i\.€i)  the  Son,  and  showeth  him  all  things  that  him- 
self doeth  "  (v.  20).  If  the  accurate  distinction  of 
the  terms  is  here  to  be  preserved,  (^iXelv  must,  in  this 
case,  refer  to  the  intimate,  personal  relation  of  the 
Father  and  the  Son  (so  Meyer,  Godet,  Weiss,  et  al.'). 
In  one  passage  also  (xvi.  27)  the  love  of  the  Father  for 
the  disciples  of  ChTTstTs'aesignated  by  (fxXeiv :  "  For 
the  Father  himself  loveth  ((f)LXet)  you,"  etc.  Here,  in 
the  judgment  of  most  interpreters,  the  thought  is,  The 
Father  loves  you  as  his  children  because  of  your  love 
to  me  (Christ),  and  therefore  hears  and  grants  your 
requests.  In  these  two  cases  where  <^Ckeiv  is  used  of 
God's  love  to  another  it  is  not  difficult  to  assign  to  it 
an  appropriate  force  as  designating  the  close  attach- 
ment of  personal  affection. 

Again,  John  applies  afyarrav  to  the  love  of  the 
Son  to  the  Father  (xiv.  31),  and  to  his  love  for  his 
disciples,  either  individually  or  generally  (xi.  5;  xiii. 
1,  34  ;  xiv.  21) ;  while  ^iXelv  is  also  found  to  describe 
the  love  of  Jesus  for  a  disciple  or  friend  (xi.  3,  36 ; 
XX.  2).  The  love  of  the  Master  for  the  "beloved 
disciple  "  is  four  times  designated  by  ar^airav  (xiii.  23  ; 
xix.  26 ;  xxi.  7,  20)  and  only  once  by  c^tXelv  (xx.  2). 
This  example  of  the  use  of  <^iXelv  seems  to  show 
that  John  sometimes  employs  the  words  interchange- 
ably, although  it  does  not  necessarily  prove  that  they 
bear  precisely  the  same  shade  of  meaning.     But  in 


270  TPIE   JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

such  cases  the  proper  distinction  of  the  words  must 
not  be  overprcssed.  Another  instance  of  an  appar- 
ently interchangeable  use  of  the  words  is  found  in 
the  narrative  of  Jesus'  relations  with  the  family  at 
Bethany.  His  love  for  Lazarus  is  designated  by 
(f>i\€lv  (xi.  3,  36),  while  that  for  the  three  members 
of  the  family,  who  are  named  in  succession,  is  ex- 
pressed by  ayajrav  (xi.  5).  This  usage  is  sometimes 
explained  by  saying  that  in  verses  3  and  36  the 
sisters  and  the  Jews,  who  speak  of  Jesus'  love  for 
Lazarus,  naturally  use  the  more  emotional  word, 
while  the  evangelist,  who  speaks  in  verse  5,  uses  the 
loftier  and  less  impulsive  word  (so  Plummer  and 
Westcott).  Others  think  that  the  higher  word  ayairdv 
(in  xi.  5)  is  chosen  with  great  delicacy  by  John  be- 
cause the  sisters,  Martha  and  Mary,  are  also  men- 
tioned (so  Meyer  and  Weiss).  H.  Holtzmann  regards 
the  two  examples  just  cited  (iii.  35,  cf.  v.  20 ;  xi.  3, 
36,  cf.  xi.  5)  as  proving  that  John  uses  the  two  verbs 
promiscuously. 

The  love  of  the  disciples  for  Christ  (viii.  42 ;  xiv. 
15  sq.)  and  for  their  brethren  (xiii.  34 ;  xv.  17  et  al.} 
is  generally  designated  by  ayairdv,  although  (fnXelv  is 
also  found  (xvi.  27 ;  xxi.  15  sq.).  The  passage  last 
cited  is  one  of  considerable  interest  and  difficulty  in 
its  bearing  upon  the  usage  of  the  words.  Jesus  twice 
asks  Peter :  ayaTrd'i  fie ;  and  Peter  replies :  <^iXw  o-e. 
The  third  time  the  question  is :  ^tXeZ?  /xe ;  and  Peter 
still  answers  :  (j)t\(b  ae.  The  almost  universal  opinion 
of  interpreters  is  that  the  change  of  words  is  inten- 


THE   DOCTRINE  OF  LOVE  271 

tional,  and  that  the  point  of  the  conversation  is  largely 
lost  by  overlooking  the  distinction.  The  view  gener- 
ally adopted  is  that  Jesus  nses  the  loftier  word  ex- 
pressing deliberate  choice  and  devotion,  and  that 
Peter  hesitates  to  claim  such  a  love,  but  affirms  the 
love  of  personal  affection  :  ^t\c3  ae.  Jesus  then  drops 
to  the  level  of  Peter's  own  assertion,  and  says :  Are 
you  sure  that  you  love  me  even  thus  —  <^iXet?  /xe ;  — 
alluding,  probably,  to  Peter's  previous  denial  of  him, 
and,  perhaps,  asking  the  question  three  times  be- 
cause of  the  three  denials.  To  this  question  Peter 
replies  affirmatively,  but  without  claiming  more  than 
the  affection  denoted  by  cfuXelv.  Some  have  called  in 
question  the  distinction  upon  which  the  foregoing 
interpretation  proceeds,  on  the  ground  of  the  seem- 
ingly interchangeable  use  of  the  terms  which  we 
have  already  noticed.  Even  Weiss,  who  observes  the 
natural  distinction  of  the  words  in  the  other  cases, 
thinks  it  doubtful  whether  it  is  applicable  here.  If 
Jesus  had  throughout  employed  ayaTrdv,  while  Peter 
uniformly  used  (fnXeiv,  the  recognition  of  the  distinc- 
tion would  be,  in  my  judgment,  more  natural  than  it 
now  is.  The  supposition  of  an  intentional  change 
from  ayaTrdv  in  the  first  two  to  (f)t\€iv  in  the  third 
question,  is  unnecessary  to  the  sense  and  force  of  the 
passage,  and  seems  somewhat  over-subtle.  Moreover, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  this  conversation,  in  all 
probability,  was  held  in  Aramaic,  in  which  no  such 
distinction  as  that  between  the  two  Greek  verbs  could 
have  l)een  marked.     To  this  difficulty  it  is  replied  that 


272  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

we  must  deal  with  the  Greek  version  of  the  event  as 
we  have  it,  and  that  by  some  additional  words  or  ges- 
tures the  Lord  may  have  made  such  a  distinction  as 
the  Greek  has  preserved.^ 

Whatever  opinion  be  adopted  respecting  these  few 
doubtful  cases  which  we  have  just  mentioned,  there 
can,  I  think,  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  distinc- 
tion between  a^airav  and  (f)c\eiv  is,  in  general,  appli- 
cable in  the  writings  of  John.^  Even  in  those  few 
instances  where  the  two  words  appear  to  be  used 
synonymously  there  is  a  certain  presumption  that  a 
difference  of  meaning  is  really  implied.  In  any  case, 
we  have  here  to  do  with  love  in  the  distinctively 
moral  and  religious  sense,  which  is  specially  denoted 
by  ayaTrdv  and  ayaTn].  It  is  necessary  next  to  no- 
tice what  is  affirmed  of  the  subjects  and  objects  of 
this  love,  and  then  to  inquire  into  its  nature  and 
significance. 

When  God  is  the   subject  of   this  love  there  are 

1  So  Schaff,  in  Lange  on  John,  in  loco. 

2  Dr.  W.  G.  Ballentine,  in  an  elaborate  article  on  the  subject 
{Bihliotlieca  Sacra,  Ju\j,  1889),  not  only  denies  that  there  is  any 
distinction  betweeii  dyarrdv  and  (piXflv  in  John  xxi.  15  sq.,  but  con- 
tends that  the  distinctions  commonly  made  between  them  are 
not  applicable  in  the  New  Testament  generally.  His  evidence 
is  drawn  almost  wholly  from  the  Septuagint,  where  he  shows 
that  the  words  are  often  used  without  discrimination.  A 
promiscuous  use  of  the  terms  in  the  New  Testament  would  not 
necessarily  follow  from  such  a  use  in  the  Septuagint,  nor  would 
a  few  cases  in  which  the  distinction  between  them  is  doubtful 
suffice  to  prove  that  the  New  Testament  writers  in  general 
used  the  words  synonymously. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  273 

three  objects  upon  which  it  is  said  to  terminate,  the 
Son  (iii.  35  et  al),  the  world  (iii.  16),  and  the  disci- 
ples of  Christ  (xiv.  21,  23).  In  I.  iv.  10,  11,  John 
speaks  of  the  love  which  God  has  shown  to  his 
readers  in  sending  Clirist  as  the  propitiation  for 
their  sins.  This  passage  refers,  therefore,  to  God's 
love  to  them  while  they  were  yet  sinners,  and  belongs, 
practically,  with  iii.  16,  which  speaks  of  his  love  to 
the  world  (6  /coV/xo?).  Of  similar  import  is  I.  iii.  1, 16  : 
"Behold  what  manner  of  love  the  Father  hath  be- 
stowed upon  us,"  etc.  While,  therefore,  the  love  of 
God  to  the  sinful  world  is  not  often  explicitly  men- 
tioned, it  is  several  times  referred  to,  and  is  assumed 
in  many  passages  besides  those  just  cited.  The  Son 
is  said  to  love  the  Father  (xiv.  31),  and  his  disciples 
(xiii.  1 ;  xiv.  21).  Christians  are  spoken  of  (I.  v.  1, 
2)  in  contrast  to  non-Christians  (v.  42;  I.  ii.  5),  as 
loving  God,  and  still  more  frequently  as  loving  Christ 
(xiv.  21-28)  and  one  another  (xiii.  34,  35 ;  I.  iii.  10- 
14).  Over  against  this  true  religious  love  to  God  and 
man  stands  the  love  of  darkness  (iii.  19),  or  of  the 
world  (I.  ii.  15). 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  love  which  is  so  central  in 
John's  conception  of  religion  is  a  personal  relation 
between  man  and  God,  on  the  one  hand,  and  among 
men  themselves,  on  the  other.  The  apostle  reaches 
his  highest  point  of  contemplation  in  placing  the  seat 
of  love  in  the  very  nature  of  God  himself.  The  duty 
of  men  to  love  one  another  springs  from  the  nature 
and   source    of    love.      It  is   a   divine   principle,   a 

18 


274  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

quality  of  God's  own  nature  and  action ;  nay,  it  is 
a  name  for  God's  ethical  nature  itself.  The  life  of 
true  love  is  therefore  a  divinely  imparted  life.  It  is 
derived  from  God  and  involves  fellowship  with  him. 
Whence  it  follows  :  "  He  that  loveth  not  knoweth  not 
God ;  for  God  is  love "  (I.  iv.  8).  For  the  mind  of 
John  the  ethical  nature  of  God  determines  the  nature 
and  demands  of  the  Christian  life.  To  be  like  God 
is  the  sum  of  all  Christian  obligations.  "  If  we  love 
one  another,  God  abideth  in  us,  and  his  love  is  per- 
fected in  us  "  (I.  iv.  12).  "  God  is  love  ;  and  he  that 
abideth  in  love  abideth  in  God,  and  God  abideth  in 
him  "  (I.  iv.  16). 

It  should  not,  of  course,  be  supposed  that  in  saying 
"  God  is  love "  the  apostle  intended  to  construct  a 
scientific  definition  of  the  moral  nature  of  God.  In 
the  very  nature  of  the  case,  love  scarcely  admits  of 
accurate  and  exhaustive  definition.  The  analysis  of 
the  divine  attributes  to  which  we  in  modern  times  are 
accustomed  did  not  engage  the  minds  of  the  New 
Testament  writers,  who  spoke  in  popular  language 
and  for  practical  religious  ends.  But  while  it  is  im- 
possible to  maintain  that  John  had  ever  proposed 
to  himself  to  construct  a  precise  conception  of  love 
which  should  answer  the  demands  of  scientific  thought, 
he  has,  nevertheless,  given  us  a  concise  statement  of 
God's  moral  nature  upon  which  theological  thought 
cannot  improve.  It  is,  at  any  rate,  quite  unjustifiable 
to  treat  his  statement  as  if  it  meant  only  that  God, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  has  love  for  men,  or  that  he  has 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF  LOVE  275 

chosen  —  though  he  might  have  done  otherwise  —  to 
love  his  creatures,  on  the  theory  that  love  is  only  a 
subordinate  attribute  of  God  which  it  is  optional  with 
him  to  exercise  or  not.  Whatever  be  the  scope  or 
content  of  love,  as  John  uses  the  word,  it  certainly 
represents  to  his  mind  an  essential  and  constituent 
element  in  the  divine  nature,  and  theology  has  never 
been  able  to  construct  a  better  definition  of  the  ethical 
perfection  of  God  than  is  contained  in  the  apostle's 
words  :  "  God  is  love."  ^ 

I  am  persuaded  that  no  proposition  could  be  more 
directly  contrary  to  the  fundamental  principles  of 
John's  teaching  than  that  which  has  been  so  com- 
monly affirmed  in  theology  that  justice  is  the  central 
and  all-determining  attribute  of  God,  to  which  love  is 
only  subordinate  and  secondary.     This  is  the  formula 

1  "  The  saying  of  the  apostle,  '  God  is  love,'  is  the  best  com- 
pendium of  the  Christian  idea  of  God."  — Van  Oosterzee,  Christ- 
ian Dogmatics,  i.  269.  "  Love  is  the  supreme,  the  only  adequate 
definition  of  the  essence  of  God."  —  Dorner,  System,  i.  454.  "  God 
himself  is  good  only  as  he  is  love,  and  his  holiness  and  right- 
eousness depend  upon  his  love."  —  Muller,  The  Christian  Doctrine 
of  Sin,  i.  113.  "God  is  love,  the  perfect,  the  absolutely  good 
and  only  good  Being,  so  that  no  attribute  or  activity  can  be  as- 
cribed to  him  which  cannot  be  derived  from  his  love." Nitzsch, 

Systein,  p.  145.  "  In  the  Old  Testament  love  is  an  attribute 
of  God,  one  of  many  exercised  in  particular  relations.  In  the 
New  Testament  first  love  can  be  shown  to  be  the  very  Being  of 
God  as  answering  to  the  revelation  in  Christ ;  and  we  may  see 
a  certain  fitness  in  the  fact  that  this  crowning  truth  is  brought 
out  in  the  latest  of  the  apostolic  writings."  —  Westcott,  The 
Epistles  of  St.  John,  p.  168. 


276  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

which  a  rigorous,  formal  logic  has  sought  to  apply  in 
theology,  upon  the  assumption  that  God  is  a  judge 
rather  than  a  Father,  and  that  the  world  which  he 
has  made  is  a  legal  rather  than  a  moral  world.  Some 
show  of  justification  for  this  view  may  be  found  in 
the  legalism  of  the  Old  Testament,  although  an  appeal 
in  support  of  it  to  the  Talmud,  which  represents  the 
later  religious  thought  of  Judaism  when  juridical  con- 
ceptions had  wellnigh  supplanted  moral  ones,  would 
be  far  better  warranted.  It  may  seem  to  be  favored 
by  the  survival  in  Paul  of  some  traces  of  Pharisaic 
thought,  but  with  both  the  language  and  spirit  of 
John  it  is  in  irreconcilable  contradiction.  This  sub- 
ject will  meet  us  again  when  we  come  to  consider  the 
relation  of  love  to  righteousness. 

John  neither  gives  us  a  definition  of  love,  nor  fur- 
nishes the  material  for  a  formal  definition.  What  his 
conception  of  love  is,  we  are  left  to  infer  from  tlie 
qualities  which  are  ascribed  to  it  and  the  actions 
which  flow  from  it.  The  more  important  of  these  we 
will  enumerate. 

(1)  Love  is  a  personal  relation  of  communion  or 
fellowship,  or,  at  least,  looks  forward  to  the  constitu- 
tion of  such  a  relation.  The  intimate  fellowship  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son  illustrates  the  highest  form  of 
love.  It  involves  perfect  fellowship  of  sympathy  and 
interest,  and  the  perfect  mutual  delight  of  each  sub- 
ject in  the  object  of  love.  John  presents  this  perfect 
communion  as  the  type  of  love  among  men  :  "  Even 
as   the   Father   hath   loved    me,   I   also   have   loved 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  277 

you  :  abide  ye  in  my  love.  .  .  .  This  is  my  command- 
ment, that  ye  love  one  another  even  as  I  have  loved 
you  "  (xv.  9,  12).  Here  the  love  of  the  Father  for 
the  Son  is  the  norm  of  the  Son's  love  for  his  disciples, 
and  this  love,  in  turn,  is  the  type  and  measure  of 
all  true  love  among  brethren.  Love  is  a  personal 
life-union  involving  reciprocal  delight,  interest,  and 
attachment. 

This  relation  is  sometimes  described  as  an  indwell- 
ing, or  abiding,  of  one  person  in  another.  This  mode 
of  expression  is  doubtless  chosen  in  order  to  empha- 
size the  closeness  of  the  relation.  Love  involves  a 
certain  "  oneness  "  of  those  whom  it  unites.  Each  is 
at  once  the  subject  and  the  object  of  love.  Love  is 
mutual,  or,  at  least,  naturally  tends  to  become  so.  A 
community  of  feeling,  thought,  and  interest  springs 
up  where  love  binds  persons  together.  Jesus  prays 
that  his  disciples  "  may  be  one  "  even  as  he  and  the 
Father  are  one,  and  explains  in  what  follows  that  this 
unity  of  which  he  speaks  is  a  unity  which  is  born  of 
love  :  "  I  in  them,  and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be 
perfected  into  one,  that  the  world  may  know  that 
thou  didst  send  me,  and  lovedst  them,  even  as  thou 
lovedst  me  "  (xvii.  23). 

Love  is,  therefore,  the  true  unifying  bond  among 
men.  It  is  the  principle  which  leads  each  to  make 
the  interest  of  all  his  care.  From  this  consideration 
it  appears,  as  John  says,  that  "  love  is  of  God  "  {etc 
Tov  6eov,  1.  iv.  7)  ;  it  is  a  principle  essentially  divine. 
The  capacity  to  love  is  implanted  in  man  by  him  in 


278  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

whose  image  he  is  made.  As  God  is  the  ground  of 
all  unity  and  harmony  in  the  universe,  so  God-likeness 
among  men,  that  is,  love,  is  the  true  bond  of  brother- 
hood. Selfishness  is  the  principle  of  isolation ;  love 
alone  binds  men  together  in  helpful  and  happy  rela- 
tions. All  love  among  men  is  a  reflection  of  the 
divine  nature  in  them,  and  a  trace  of  the  presence  in 
human  life  of  him  who  is  ever  seeking  to  reconcile 
men  to  himself,  to  one  another,  and  to  their  true 
destiny ;  to  solve  the  contradictions  and  abolish  the 
discords  of  life,  and  to  unite  men  in  the  kingdom  of 
love  and  peace.^ 

(2)  It  follows  from  what  has  been  said  that  love 
is  by  its  very  nature  a  social  virtue.  Love  carries  us 
out  of  ourselves.  It  is  essentially  inconsistent  with 
the  indifferent  temper.  It  is  an  active,  forthputting 
quality  whose  very  nature  is  violated  by  the  hermit- 
spirit.  Love  implies  mutual  relations  and  common 
interests.  It  is  the  social  principle  in  man.  Mutual 
service  and  helpfulness,  which  spring  out  of  love, 
make  social  life  possible.  If  these  were  wholly  want- 
ing, society  would  revert  to  barbarism,  which  is  sim- 
ply extreme  individualism  involving  utter  disregard 
of  others  or  of  the  general  weal.  Love  is  therefore 
the  only  principle  on  which  a  true  civilization  can 
be  built. 

This  idea  is  involved  in  the  doctrine  which  John  so 
often  presents,  —  that  love  is  the  true  basis  of  union 

1  For  an  ample  discussion  of  "  uniting  love,"  see  Sartorius 
on  The  Doctrine  of  Divine  Love,  pp.  260-309. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  279 

in  the  kingdom  of  God.  One  brotherhood  knit  to- 
gether by  love  is  the  ideal  society.  The  kingdom  of 
God  is  realized  among  men  in  proportion  as  they  live 
the  life  of  love,  that  is,  in  proportion  as  they  love  one 
another  as  Christ  has  loved  them.  As  the  provisions 
of  redemption  proceed  from  the  divine  love,  so  the 
realization  of  its  results  in  the  life  of  the  world  must 
be  brought  about  by  the  reign  of  love  in  mankind. 
The  divine  love  is  redeeming  the  world  into  itself. 
Salvation  springs  from  love  and  man  is  saved  unto 
love.  This  is  but  to  say  that  God  in  redemption  is 
bringing  men  to  himself,  and  uniting  them  into  a 
brotherhood  through  their  common  likeness  to  him- 
self. Here  again  we  see  illustrated  a  peculiarity  of 
John's  thought  which  we  have  more  than  once  ob- 
served, —  the  tendency  to  ground  the  whole  nature 
and  all  the  requirements  of  the  religious  life  in  the 
being  of  God.  Love  must  be  the  true  principle  of 
fellowship  in  the  divine  kingdom  and  the  law  of 
Christian  duty,  since  God  is  love.  Religion  is  man's 
fellowship  with  God,  and  involves  fellowship  among 
men,  and  neither  is,  in  its  best  sense,  possible  except 
upon  the  basis  of  ethical  likeness  to  God. 

(3)  The  possession  of  love  is  the  guaranty  of  right- 
eous living.  The  life  of  love  and  the  life  of  sin  are 
essentially  incompatible.  The  apostle  puts  this  prin- 
ciple forward  in  the  sharpest  possible  form  when  he 
says  :  "  Whosoever  is  begotten  of  God "  —  that  is, 
has  entered  the  life  of  love  —  "  does  not  commit  sin 
{afiapriav  ov  Troiet),  because  his  seed  abideth  in  him  : 


280  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  is  begotten  of  God" 
(I.  iii.  9).  Love  and  sin  are  contrary,  that  is,  love  is 
essentially  righteous.  Many  other  passages  presup- 
pose this  idea.  Brotherly  love  is  a  quality  of  those 
who  abide  in  the  light,  that  is,  live  the  life  of  love  in 
fellowship  with  God,  while  hatred  of  one's  brother  is 
a  work  of  darkness,  that  is,  a  mark  of  the  sinful  life 
(I.  ii.  10, 11).  Love  of  the  world  —  supreme  attach- 
ment to  the  pleasures  and  possessions  of  this  outward, 
passing  order  of  things  —  is  inconsistent  with  love  to 
the  Father,  which  implies  fellowship  of  life  with  God, 
and  moral  likeness  to  him  (L  ii.  15-17).  Again,  the 
bestowment  of  the  Father's  love  upon  men,  and  the 
answering  love  of  the  human  heart  makes  men  chil- 
dren of  God,  and  as  such  the  sinful  world  does  not 
know  them.  Their  lives  are  ruled  by  love,  and  the 
world  has  no  just  appreciation  of  that  sort  of  life. 
As  the  world  in  its  selfish  isolation  from  God  does 
not,  in  an  ethical  sense,  know  him,  so  does  it  not 
know  those  who  have  entered  into  the  divine  life  of 
love,  since  love  and  sin  are  opposites  (L  iii,  1).  The 
same  thought  is  amplified  in  the  verses  which  follow. 
Childship  to  God  involves  the  hope  of  increasing  like- 
ness to  him  (or  to  Christ).  "  Every  one  that  hath 
this  hope  (of  becoming  like  the  divine  ideal)  set  on 
him  (Christ),  purifieth  himself,  even  as  he  (Christ)  is 
pure"  (Liii.  2,3). 

The  centrality  of  love  in  the  Christian  life  is  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  the  apostle  has  a  comprehen- 
sive and  profound  view  of  the  nature  of  love.     It  so 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF   LOVE  281 

includes  or  involves  all  the  moral  perfections  of  God 
that  it  can  be  made  the  law  and  measure  of  all  his 
commandments.  Love  is  therefore  central  in  religion 
because  it  is  central  in  God  ;  and  as  it  is  central  in 
his  nature,  so  is  it  central  in  his  action  and  require- 
ments. The  limitation  of  the  meaning  of  love  by 
which  it  is  made  a  name  for  benevolence  or  good- 
nature, and  is  then  set  in  sharp  contrast  to  right- 
eousness and  made  secondary  and  inferior  to  it,  is  a 
procedure  in  theology  which  can  find  no  warrant  in 
John's  conception  of  the  subject.  To  his  mind,  love 
and  righteousness  are  inseparably  intertwined ;  in 
fact,  they  are  essentially  one.  Love  is  holy  in  its 
very  nature  ;  the  life  of  love  is  the  righteous  life. 
Over  and  over  the  apostle  insists  that  the  sinful  acts 
of  men  spring  from  lack  of  love.  To  do  righteousness, 
that  is,  to  live  the  righteous  life,  and  to  love  are  syn- 
onymous (L  iii.  10).  Cain's  murder  —  a  representa- 
tive sinful  deed  —  illustrates  the  violation  of  the 
principle  of  love  which  from  the  beginning  of  Christ's 
teaching  had  been  the  substance  of  the  gospel  mes- 
sage "(I.  iii.  11,  12).  The  absence  of  love  is  moral 
death  ;  the  possession  of  love  is  eternal  life  (I.  iii.  14). 
Love  to  God  begets  pity  and  compassion.  The 
apostle  contends  that  a  man  cannot  be  a  Christian 
and  refrain  from  pitying  and  helping  a  brother  in  dis- 
tress (I.  iii.  17)  ;  yet  it  is  gravely  argued  in  theology 
that  it  is  optional  with  God  to  withhold  mercy  or 
grace  from  his  creatures  without  the  impairment  of 
his  perfection.     It  would  be  denied  by  none  that  the 


282  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

exercise  of  pity,  compassion,  or  grace,  is  good.  Yet 
it  is  held  to  be  optional  with  God  whether  to  be  good 
to  that  extent,  or  not.  It  has  been  claimed  that  what 
is  false  in  philosophy  may  be  true  in  theology.  This 
appears  to  be  the  only  principle  on  which  the  theo- 
logical dictum  to  which  we  have  just  referred  can  be 
justified.  I  have  more  than  once  referred  to  it  in 
order  that  it  might  bo  looked  at  from  different  sides 
and  tested  by  the  various  expressions  of  the  apostle, 
which  illustrate  his  conception  of  love.  If  it  is  true 
in  dogmatic  theology,  it  is  certainly  false  in  John's 
whole  philosophy  of  revelation  and  life.  It  affirms  a 
possible  disposition  or  mode  of  action  on  God's  part 
which,  according  to  John,  would  vitiate  the  character 
of  a  Christian  man.  The  argument  which  John's 
writings  furnish  against  the  dictum  in  question  might 
be  briefly  summed  up  in  saying:  God  is  Christian; 
that  is,  Christ  is,  in  his  character  and  commands, 
the  interpreter  of  the  nature  and  action  of  God,  and 
the  import  of  his  message  is  that  God  is  love,  and 
that  love  is  in  its  very  nature  pitying,  generous, 
and  forgiving. 

At  the  risk  of  some  possible  repetition  let  us  follow 
out  the  conceptions  of  God  as  love  and  of  the  essen- 
tial unity  of  righteousness  and  love,  which  we  find 
in  John.  Love  is  essential  and  constituent  in  God's 
nature.  If  God  is  love,  he  must  act  as  love.  A 
quality  or  attribute  without  which  God  would  not  be 
the  perfect  Being  he  is,  cannot  be  merely  subordinate 
in  his  nature,  and  cannot  be  conceived  of  as  merely 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  283 

passive  or  quiescent.  Love  has  been  eternally  opera- 
tive within  the  internal  relations  of  the  Deity.  In 
these  relations  it  is  not  only  constitutive  but  it  operates 
from  an  ethical  necessity  springing  from  the  nature 
of  God.  Let  us  apply  the  subject  to  created  spirits 
who  have  never  sinned.  If  love  moved  God  to  create 
them  and  to  sustain  them  in  life,  is  it  rational  to  sup- 
pose that  God  can  withhold  his  love  from  them,  —  that 
in  the  case  which  we  have  supposed  love  is  a  purely 
optional  attribute  ?  To  me  this  seems  quite  incon- 
ceivable, it  being  understood  that  the  necessity  to  love 
of  which  I  speak  is  a  purely  moral  necessity  spring- 
ing, not  from  any  source  outside  the  Deity,  but  from 
his  own  immanent  perfections.  If  love  is  a  quality 
so  essential  in  God  that  without  it  he  would  not  be 
God,  it  is  surely  no  presumption  to  say  that  God  must 
love,  at  least,  his  sinless  creatures,  since  love  cannot 
be  essential  and  constituent  in  his  nature  and  purely 
optional  as  to  its  exercise. 

It  is  needless  to  follow  out  in  detail  the  application 
of  the  dictum  in  question  to  the  subject  of  redemption. 
It  is  sufficient  for  our  purpose  to  show  that  the  theory 
that  retributive  justice  is  superior  to  and  independent 
of  love  in  God,  and  that  there  springs  from  his  very 
nature  a  necessity  that  he  should  be  just,  but  no 
necessity  that  he  should  be  gracious  or  generous,  is 
incongruous  with  the  teaching  of  the  apostle  John. 
We  may,  however,  add  that  since,  as  all  admit,  God 
has  always  loved  even  sinners,  it  is  probably  according 
to  his  nature  to  do  so.     If  love  were  only  secondary 


284  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

and  subordinate  to  justice,  it  would  be  unlikely  that 
the  lower  attribute  would  always  prevail.  If,  as  Cal- 
vinistic  theology  has  so  urgently  asserted,  there  is  a 
conflict  in  the  Divine  Being  between  love  and  justice, 
it  is  certainly  strange  that  the  supreme  attribute 
whose  exercise  is  absolutely  necessary  did  not  triumph 
over  the  subordinate  and  optional  quality,  and  exclude 
the  sinful  world  from  salvation  altogether.  This 
theology  really  lays  no  logical  ground  for  a  plan  of 
grace  for  sinners.  It  is  inconceivable  that  a  work  of 
gracious  salvation  could  ever  be  begun  if  God  were 
what  this  theory  defines  him  to  be. 

Respecting  the  attitude  of  God  as  love  toward  sinful 
men,  it  is  important  not  to  confound  two  widely  dif- 
ferent conceptions,  that  of  any  obligation  on  God's 
part  to  love  sinners  as  such,  and  that  of  his  obligations 
to  himself  as  the  perfect  Being.  There  is  nothing,  of 
course,  in  the  sinful  man  as  such  which  can  make  a 
claim  upon  God's  mercy  or  constitute  a  basis  of  obli- 
gation, but  there  is  an  obligation  to  show  mercy 
which  is  grounded  in  the  Divine  Being  himself  as 
morally  perfect,  that  is,  as  uniting  in  his  own  nature 
all  possible  excellences.  When  it  is  argued  that  as 
men  must  be  righteous  but  may  or  may  not  be  kind, 
so  God  must  be  just,  but  may  or  may  not  be  merciful, 
the  premises  should  be  carefully  tested.  Suppose  a 
man  chose  not  to  be  kind.  Is  he,  in  that  case,  the 
sort  of  a  man  which  he  ought  to  be  ?  Is  he  as  good, 
as  morally  excellent,  as  he  would  be  if  he  were  kind  ? 
Certainly  not,  unless  one  denies  that  kindness  is  a 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  LOVE  285 

virtue.  A  man  even  is  under  obligation  to  be  kind. 
How  preposterous  to  claim  that  God  is  less  obligated 
to  perfection  of  life  than  man.  His  obligation  to  pos- 
sess and  to  exercise  all  virtuous  attributes  is  absolute, 
but  it  is  founded  in  nothing  above  or  outside  himself, 
but  in  his  own  eternally  perfect  ethical  nature. 

The  view  that  love  can  be  a  passive,  quiescent,  or 
potential  quality  only,  is  contrary  to  the  very  idea  of 
love.  Love  is  an  active  power,  an  energizing  affec- 
tion. To  conceive  of  it  as  possibly  quiescent  or  non- 
operative  in  the  perfect  Being  is  to  misconceive  its 
nature.  Such  a  conception  cannot  be  applied  even  in 
human  relations,  to  say  nothing  of  its  inapplicability 
to  God  in  his  relations  to  his  creatures.  What  would 
be  said  of  a  man  who  maintained  that  he  was  at 
liberty,  at  will,  to  love  his  fellow-men  or  not  ?  The 
character  of  the  strictly  and  merely  just  Shylock  who 
felt  that  it  was  optional  with  him  whether  he  should 
be  kind  or  merciful,  and  who  chose  not  to  be  so,  has 
not  been  generally  admired.  It  is  amazing  that  theo- 
logical speculation  should  ever  have  held  that  such  a 
disposition  may  be  regarded  as  conceivable  and  possi- 
ble for  the  God  of  all  grace.^ 

^  Cf.  my  review,  in  the  New  Englander  for  June,  1888,  of  Dr. 
A.  H.  Strong's  Philosophy  and  Religion,  —  a  work  in  which  it  is 
maintained  that  holiness  and  love  are  essentially  different ;  that 
holiness  is  the  fundamental  and  determining  attribute  of  God, 
and  that  justice,  therefore,  must  be  exercised,  while  benevolence 
or  love  —  the  self -imparting  impulse  in  God  —  may  he  exercised 
or  not.  "  As  we  may  be  kind  but  must  be  righteous,  so  God, 
in  whose  image  we  are  made,  may  be  merciful,  but  must  be 


286  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

(4)  Love  is  presented  in  John  as  the  giving  im- 
pulse in  God,  the  motive  of  his  self-communication. 
"  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  "  (iii.  16),  is 
the  keynote  of  John's  doctrine  of  love  in  this  aspect 
of  it.  The  gift  of  the  Son  for  the  salvation  of  the 
world  is  the  supreme  expression  and  proof  of  God's 
love  for  the  world.  As  this  greatest  of  his  gifts  is 
born  of  love,  so  also  are  all  his  benefactions  and  self- 
impartations.  It  is  the  very  nature  of  love  to  give 
and  to  bless,  and  this  giving  is,  in  the  last  analysis, 
self-giving.  "  Behold  what  manner  of  love  the  Father 
hath  given  to  us  (^SeScoKev  r^fuv),  that  we  should 
be  called  children  of  God  "  (I.  iii.  1),  exclaims  the 
apostle.  God  bestows  his  life  upon  us  ;  he  imparts 
his  own  nature  to  us  in  making  us  his  children.  Wo 
become  children  of  God  by  a  divine  birth,  by  an  im- 
partation  from  God  himself.  Thus  he  who  is  love 
bestows  his  love  upon  us  so  that  we  abide  in  love, 
that  is,  abide  in  God,  and  God  in  us  (I.  iv.  16).  So 
too  the  gift  of  Christ  to  the  world  is  God's  gift  of 
himself  to  us,  since  Christ  shares  eternally  in  the 
Father's  nature  and  comes  forth  from  the  bosom  of 

holy.  Mercy  is  optional  with  him  "'  (page  196).  The  same  view 
underlies  the  whole  soteriology  of  this  author's  Systematic  The- 
ology, as  it  does  that  of  Dr.  Shedd's  Dogmatic  Theology.  I  ven- 
ture also  to  refer  to  my  reviews  of  both  these  works  in  the  Neio 
Englander  for  January,  1887,  and  for  February,  1889,  respec- 
tively. See,  also,  Dr.  E.  A.  Park's  sermon  (on  the  text :  "  God 
is  love  ") :  All  the  Moral  Attributes  of  God  are  comprehended  in 
his  Love,  in  the  volume  entitled,  Discourses  on  some  Theological 
Doctrines,  etc.,  Andover,  1885. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  LOVE  287 

the  Father,  Creation,  redemption,  and  providence 
are  all  grounded  in  the  essential  and  eternal  love  of 
God.  Love  is  the  bond  of  intercommunion  in  the 
immanent  and  eternal  relations  which  are  involved 
in  the  equal  deity  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit. 
These  eternal  relations  within  the  Deity  ever  give 
scope  to  the  exercise  of  love,  so  that,  even  apart  from 
creation,  it  is  rightly  defined  as  the  transitive  attri- 
bute of  the  divine  nature.  "  Love  can  be  described 
as  a  need  that  can  be  satisfied  only  by  giving.  .  .  . 
Love  is  no  external  attribute,  needing  created  rela- 
tions in  order  to  its  exercise,  for  it  was  before  crea- 
tion, and  creation  was  through  it;  and  it  is  no 
attribute  of  pure  immanence,  for  though  it  lives 
within  Deity,  and  has  there  the  necessary  conditions 
of  its  life,  yet  it  ever  strives  from  within  outwards, — 
struggles,  as  it  were,  towards  creation."  ^ 

(5)  Love  is  the  motive  of  sacrifice  and  service. 
"  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this,  that  a  man 
lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends"  (xv.  13).  A  pas- 
sage in  the  First  Epistle  closely  akin  to  this  seems  to 
indicate  the  sense  in  which  Jesus  speaks  of  laying 
down  his  life :  "  Hereby  know  we  love,  because  he 
laid  down  his  life  for  us  :  and  we  ought  to  lay  down 
our  lives  for  the  brethren  "  (L  iii.  16).  We  have 
seen  in  an  earlier  chapter  (pp.  172-175)  that  the  laying 
dotvn  of  life  here  spoken  of  is  not  naturally  understood, 
as  some  scholars  hold,  to  refer  to  the  paying  down  of 
life  as  a  ransom-price.     The   term  seems  rather  to 

1  Fairbairn,  The  Place  of  Christ  in  Modern  Theology,  p.  411. 


288  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

bear  a  general  ethical  import.  Christ's  giving  of  his 
life  is  here  spoken  of  in  the  most  comprehensive 
possible  sense.  His  whole  work  of  self-giving,  cul- 
minating in  his  death,  is  the  product  of  love.  The 
expiatory  idea  is  not  necessarily  excluded  from  such 
expressions,  but  it  is  not  directly  signified.  Such  a 
special  idea  is  lost  in  the  general  conception.  It  is  as 
if  John  had  said :  The  Saviour's  labors  and  sufferings 
on  behalf  of  men,  whatever  their  import,  were  the 
language  of  love,  and  they  teach  us  how  Christian 
love  should  express  itself  among  brethren.  The  com- 
prehensiveness of  the  terms  used  is  noticeable.  The 
giving  of  life  seems  to  include  much  more  than  the 
experience  of  death,  since  Christians  are  to  give  their 
lives  for  one  another  as  Christ  gave  his  for  them.  All 
the  forms  in  which  Christ  gave  himself  in  serving 
love  to  men,  seem  fairly  included  in  that  laying  down 
of  his  life  of  which  the  apostle  here  speaks, 

(6)  Love  involves  faithful  devotion  to  its  object. 
This  thought  is  pictorially  presented  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  scene  in  the  familiar  home  at  Bethany 
where  Mary  anoints  the  feet  of  Jesus  with  precious 
spikenard  and  wipes  them  with  her  hair  (xii.  3). 
This  is  a  picture  of  the  grateful  love  of  the  disciple 
for  the  Master.  With  equal  vividness  is  the  love  of 
the  Lord  for  his  disciples  depicted  on  the  occasion 
when  he  takes  a  towel  and  girds  himself,  and,  pouring 
water  into  a  basin,  proceeds  to  wash  the  disciples' 
feet  (xiii.  3-5).  The  event  has  its  permanent  signifi- 
cance as  a  picture  of  devotion  and  of  service.     The 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   LOVE  289 

disposition  which  it  illustrates  is  the  offspring  of  love, 
since  it  was  the  consciousness  of  divinity  out  of  which 
sprang  the  impulse  and  effort  to  bless  and  serve, 
which  the  scene  depicts.  It  was  because  Jesus  knew 
that  he  came  forth  from  God  and  was  going  again  to 
God  that  he  girded  himself  for  this  service  (verse  3). 
Here  again  we  see  how  this  devotion  was  grounded  in 
the  very  nature  of  that  essential  divinity  whose  moral 
perfection  consists  in  love.  That  love  is  the  true 
motive  of  personal  devotion  is  assumed  in  the  words 
of  Jesus  :  "  If  ye  love  me,  ye  will  keep  my  command- 
ments "  (xiv.  15,  c/.  verses  21,  24).  The  principle  of 
love  is  one  that  can  be  securely  trusted.  The  posses- 
sion of  true  love  is  the  best  guaranty  that  the  obliga- 
tions of  the  Christian  life  will  be  discharged.  Love 
is  the  germ  which  produces  of  its  own  nature  the 
fruits  of  Christian  devotion  and  service. 


19 


CHAPTER   XII 


THE   DOCTEINE   OF    PRAYER 


Literature.  —  No  writer  on  the  Theology  of  John,  so  far  as  I 
have  observed,  has  discussed  the  doctrine  of  prayer  as  a  dis- 
tinct subject ;  but  certainly  the  interest  and  importance  of  the 
theme,  and  the  special  difficulties  which  are  connected  with  the 
references  to  it  in  John,  entitle  it  to  careful  consideration. 
For  the  discussion  of  the  points  involved,  I  must  refer  the  student 
to  the  critical  commentaries  on  the  passages  to  be  reviewed. 
The  following  references  will  be  found  useful  in  respect  to  cer- 
tain phases  of  the  subject :  Weiss  :  Johann.  Lehrh.,  Der  erhohte 
Clu-istus,  pp.  270-280,  and  Bihl  TkeoL,  The  Church  of  the  Dis- 
ciples, ii.  398-404  (orig.  654-658) ;  Westcott  :  The  Epistles  o/L— 
'  St.  John,  The  Divine  Name,  pp.  243-245 ;  Ezra  Abbot  : 
Critical  Essays,  The  Distinction  between  atreco  and  epardcOf 
pp.  113-136  (reprinted  from  the  North  American  Review,  Jan., 
1872)  ;  Bernard  :  The  Central  Teaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  pas- 
sim ;  F.  W.  Robertson's  sermon  on  Prayer  (Am.  ed.  pp.  644- 
651).  The  general  subject  is  discussed  in  most  treatises  on 
Doctrinal  Theology  and  Christian  Ethics. 

The  subject  of  prayer  as  presented  in  the  Johan- 
nine  writings  may  be  naturally  divided  into  four 
sub-topics:  (1)  The  words  by  which  prayer  is  de- 
scribed; (2)  The  references  which  are  made  to  the 
prayers  of  Christ;  (3)  Indications  respecting  the 
nature  and  spirit  of  prayer  on  the  part  of  the  disci- 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  291 

pies;  and  (4)  assurances  in  regard  to  the  answering 
of  prayer. 

It  is  noticeable  that  John   does   not   employ  the 
words  heladai  and  irpocrevx^a-OaL,   which  are  so  com- 
monly used  in  the  New  Testament  in  reference  to 
prayer.     Instead  of  these  he  uses  two  words  both  of 
which  properly  mean  to  ask :   alrelv,  to  ask  in  the  1^^  — 
sense  of  making  a  request,  and  ipcordv,  to  ask  in  the  L^^,\*^ 
sense    of    interrogating.     In   the    New   Testament,  ■^   (.jceu* 
however,  this  latter  word  frequently  bears  the  non-         "^ 
classical  meaning,  to  request  or  to  beseech;  and  in 
John   it  is  several  times  applied  to  the  making  of 
requests  to   God   in    prayer.     This  New  Testament 
sense   of   ipcordv  is,  no   doubt,  connected   with   the 
Septuagint  use  of  that  verb  as  a  translation  for  Ske;, 
to   ask,  which   often   means  to  ask  in  the  sense  of 
making  a  request. 

The  question  as  to  the  distinction  between  alreiv 
and  ipcoTuv  in  John's  usage,  where  the  latter  means 
to  request  or  beseech,  has  been  much  disputed  among 
scholars.  It  is  observed  that  the  word  ipwrdv  is 
regularly  applied  to  the  prayers  of  Jesus, i  while 
alreiv  is  used  in  describing  the  nrayers  of  his  dis- 
ciples. A  few  typical  examples  may  be  given:  "I 
will  pray  (epcDTTycrct))  the  Father,"  etc.  (xIa^  16);  "I 
pray  (ipanco)  for   them ;  I  pray  (epoorco)   not   for   the 

1  In  the  judgment  of  some  interpreters  epcorav  is  once  applied 
to  the  prayers  of  Christ's  disciples  :  "  In  that  day  ye  shall  ask 
(eparrjafTe)  me  nothing"  (xvi.  23).  This  point  we  shall  con- 
sider later. 


292  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

world, "  etc.  (xvii.  9) ;  "  Neither  for  these  only  do  I 
pray"  (ipcoTo)),  etc.  (xvii.  20).  The  usage  of  alreiv, 
on  the  other  hand,  may  he  illustrated  thus :  "  And 
whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  [alTr^crere)  in  my  name,  that 
will  I  do,"  etc.  (xiv.  13);  "If  ye  shall  ask  {alrrja-ere) 
anything  of  the  Father,  he  will  give  it  you  in  my 
name"  (xvi.  23) ;  "  And  whatsoever  we  ask  (alrcofxev), 
we  receive  of  him,"  etc.  (I.   iii.   22). 

It  is  certainly  quite  natural,  in  view  of  the  pecul- 
iar uniformity  with  which  John  applies  these  two 
words  to  the  prayers  of  Jesus  and  to  those  of  his  dis- 
ciples respectively,  to  seek  for  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  words  in  some  difference  between  the  rela- 
tion which  Jesus  bears  to  God  and  that  which  others 
bear  to  him.  Such  an  explanation  was  put  forward 
by  Archbishop  Trench  ^  and  has  been  accepted,  appar- 
ently on  his  authority,  by  many  other  scholars. 
He  explains  the  difference  between  the  words  as 
follows :  — 

"  Atreco,  the  Latin  peto,  is  more  submissive  and  suppli- 
ant, indeed  the  constant  word  for  the  seeking  of  the  in- 
ferior from  the  superior.  .  .  .  'Epwraw,  on  the  other  hand, 
is  the  Latin  rogo  ;  or  sometimes  interrogo,  its  only  mean- 
ing in  classical  Greek,  where  it  never  signifies  to  asA;,  but 
only  to  interrogate,  or  to  inquire.  Like  rogare,  it  implies 
that  he  who  asks  stands  on  a  certain  footing  of  equality 
with  him  from  whom  the  boon  is  asked,  as  king  with 

1  Neiv  Testament  Synonyms,  §  xl.  Trench's  explanation  of 
the  distinction  between  the  words  has  been  more  or  less  fully 
adopted  by  Wordsworth,  Lightfoot,  Alford,  and  Westcott. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  293 

king,  or,  if  not  of  equality,  on  such  a  footing  of  familiarity 
as  lends  authority  to  the  request. 

"Thus  it  is  very  notewortliy,  and  witnesses  for  the 
singular  accuracy  in  the  employment  of  words,  and  in  the 
record  of  that  employment,  which  prevails  throughout 
the  New  Testament,  that  our  Lord  never  uses  alreiv  or 
alrela-OaL  of  himself,  in  respect  of  that  which  he  seeks  on 
behalf  of  his  disciples  from  God  ;  for  his  is  not  the  pe^i- 
ti07i  of  the  creature  to  the  Creator,  but  the  request  of  the 
Son  to  the  Father.  The  consciousness  of  his  equal  dig- 
nity, of  his  potent  and  prevailing  intercession,  speaks  out 
in  this,  that  often  as  he  asks,  or  declares  that  he  will  ask, 
anything  of  the  Fatlier,  it  is  always  ipwrw^  ipoirrjaw,  an  ask- 
ing, that  is,  as  upon  equal  terms,  never  atVecj  or  alTrjaw." 

This  theory  of  the  distinction  is  certainly  attrac- 
tive, and  seems  plausible  in  view  of  the  fact  which 
we  have  observed,  that  in  the  usage  of  John  ipcordv 
is  applied  to  Christ's  prayers  and  alrelv  to  those  of 
his  disciples.  The  assertions  of  Trench,  however, 
that  iponTav  implies  "a  certain  footing  of  equality" 
between  the  one  making  the  request  and  the  object 
of  the  request,  and  that  alrelv  is  used  "  for  the  seek- 
ing of  the  inferior  from  the  superior,"  rest  on  no 
known  etymological  distinction  between  the  terms, 
and  cannot  be  maintained  unless  supported  by  un- 
questionable usage.  Dr.  Ezra  Abbot  has  shown 
that  the  distinction  breaks  down  utterly  when  this 
test  is  applied.  1     The  student  need  only  consult  the 

^  "  The  Distinction  between  ahfco  and  epwraco,"  North  American 
Review,  January,  1872,  reprinted  in  Critical  Essays,  pp.  113- 
136. 


294  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

passages  reviewed  by  Dr.  Abbot  to  be  convinced 
that  Trench's  distinction  will  hold  neither  in  the 
New  Testament  in  general,  nor  even  in  John's 
writings  in  particular.  In  order  to  show  that  no 
"footing  of  equality"  is  necessarily  implied  in  the 
word  ipcordv  ,  it  is  sufficient  to  point  out  that  the 
request  of  the  Syrophojnician  woman  that  Jesus 
would  cast  the  demon  out  of  her  daughter  (Mark 
vii.  26)  is  expressed  by  that  verb.  The  centurion 
also  asked  (ipcoroov)  Jesus  to  heal  his  servant  (Luke 
vii.  3),  and  the  Gerasenes  besought  {rjpwTT^aav)  him 
to  depart  from  them  (Luke  viii.  37).  In  these 
requests  certainly  there  can  be  no  tone  of  authority 
or  assumption  of  equality  between  the  persons 
concerned. 

If  the  uses  of  ipcordv  in  the  Gospel  of  John  (out- 
side of  the  passages  where  it  is  applied  to  the 
prayers  of  Jesus)  be  carefully  considered,  it  will  be 
found  that  they  do  not  bear  out  the  idea  that  epwrdv 
refers  to  an  asking  "  upon  equal  terms. "  The  dis- 
ciples besought  ('qpcoTcov)  Jesus  to  take  food  (iv.  31) ; 
the  Samaritans  besought  (r^poiTcov)  him  to  remain 
with  them  (iv.  40),  and  the  nobleman  of  Capernaum 
besought  (-^pcbra)  him  to  come  and  heal  his  son 
(iv.  47).  These  are  but  a  few  of  the  instances  in 
which  the  definition  of  ipcordv  as  denoting  an  asking 
on  equal  terms,  or  with  a  tone  of  authority,  is  inap- 
plicable. It  is  also  found  that  there  are  many  cases 
where  alrelv  cannot  be  shown  to  express  "the  seek- 
ing of  the  inferior  from  the  superior,"  such  as  Luke 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  295 

i.  63,  xii.  48;  Acts  xvi.  29;  1  Pet.  iii.  15;  and  Deut. 
X.  12  [Septuagint] :  "What  doth  the  Lord  thy  God 
require  {alrelraL)  of  thee?" 

Although  Trench's  theory  of  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  words  in  question  is  certainly  disproved, 
it  is  still  a  noteworthy  fact  that  the  prayers  of  Jesus 
are  referred  to  in  John  by  ipcoTav,  and  not  by  alreiv,^ 
although,  as  we  shall  see,  it  is  not  strictly  correct  to 
say,  with  Trench,  that  the  former  word  "  is  in  no 
single  instance  used  to  express  the  prayer  of  man  to 
God."  While  the  fact  that  in  John  ipcordv  is  fre- 
quently used  of  the  petitions  which  various  persons 
addressed  to  Christ,  is  fatal  to  Trench's  general 
theory,  it  still  seems  to  be  a  fact  requiring  explana- 
tion that  this  term  alone  is  used  of  the  prayers  of 
Jesus,  and  is  not  used  of  the  prayers  of  men  ad- 
dressed to  God,  while  alrelv  is  frequently  so  used. 
Dr.  Abbot's  explanation  of  the  difference  is  as 
follows :  — 

"The  main  distinction  appears  to  be  this:  Atrew  is,  in 
general,  to  ask  for  something  which  one  desires  to  receive, 
something  to  be  given,  rarely  for  something  to  be  done  ; 
it  is  therefore  used  when  the  object  sought,  rather  than  // 
the  person  of  whom  it  is  sought,  is  prominent  in  the  mind  ^ 
of  the  writer ;  hence  also  it  is  very  rarely  employed  in 
exhortation.  'EpcoTaw,  on  the  other  hand,  is  to  request  or 
beseech  a  person  to  do  something,  rarely  to  give  some- 

*  In  one  passage  (xi.  22)  Martha  uses  ahfiv  of  Jesus'  prayers, 
a  fact  to  which  Trench  appeals  as  showing  "  her  poor,  unworthy 
conception  of  his  person." 


296  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

thing  ;  it  refers  more  directly  to  the  person  of  whom  the 
favor  is  sought,  and  is  therefore  naturally  used  in  exhort- 
ation and  entreaty."  ^ 

On  this  view  of  the  difference  between  the  words, 
the  application  of  ipoordv  to  the  prayers  of  Jesus 
might,  perhaps,  be  naturally  explained  by  saying 
that  his  perfect  fellowship  and  trust,  and  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  Father,  gave  his  prayers  more  of  a  refer- 
ence to  the  Father's  person  and  were  more  of  a 
committing  of  himself  to  the  Father's  will  and 
action  than  are  the  prayers  of  others,  who  ask  rather 
that  specific  things  be  given  them.  The  prayers  of 
other  men  are  more  of  the  nature  of  petition,  while 
those  of  Jesus  arc  more  of  the  nature  of  resignation 
and  self-commitment  to  the  Father,  If  this  view  be 
taken,  it  is  obvious  that  ipcoTav,  as  applied  to  prayer, 
has  a  higher  quality  than  alrelv.  Cremer  regards 
the  difference  as  formal  rather  than  material,  alrelv 
expressing  the  desire  of  the  will  and  ipcordv  marking 
the  form  of  the  request  as  a  desire  expressed  to  God 
in  prayer. 2  Even  in  this  view  ipardv  would  suggest 
a  certain  closeness  of  fellowship  and  naturalness  of 
relation  between  the  worshipper  and  God  which 
would  not  be  associated  with  alrelv. 

The  distinction  in  usage  which  is  observable  in 
John  can  scarcely  be  accidental.  There  seems  to  be 
an  element  of  truth  in  Trench's  too  broad  and  sweep- 
ing generalizations.     Some  higher  import  and  asso- 

1  Critical  Essays,  -p.  127. 

2  Bihl.-TJieol.  Lex.,  suh  voce,  alreco. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  297 

ciations  appear  to  be  implied  in  ipcordv  than  in  alrelv, 
although  it  is  difficult  confidently  and  sharply  to 
define  the  distinction.  In  I.  v.  16  both  verbs  are 
used  of  prayer  to  God :  "  If  any  man  see  his  brother 
sinning  a  sin  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask  (alrrjaeL) 
and  God  will  give  him  life  for  them  that  sin  not  unto 
death.  There  is  a  sin  unto  death:  not  concerning 
this  do  I  say  that  he  should  make  request  "  {ipcoTqarj). 
Here  the  two  term.s  may  be  used  synonymously,  but  \. 
it  seems  to  me  likely  that  ahelv  denotes  the  making 
of  a  petition  that  something  be  granted,  while  ipcoTciv 
is  more  general  and  refers  rather  to  the  appeal  of  the 
subject  in  question  to  God's  will  and  wisdom.  As 
Cremer  suggests,  ipcoTciv  seems  here  merely  to  char- 
acterize the  form  of  prayer  more  precisely  and  to 
stand  as  the  tenderest,  finest  expression  for  praying. 
If  this  distinction  is  here  legitimate,  it  evidently 
accords  with  the  view  which  we  have  taken  of  the 
usage  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Alrelv  is  the  more 
specific  and  more  urgent  word ;  it  suggests  the  idea 
of  petition  for  some  definite  gift;  ipcordv  is  more 
genera],  and  is  the  higher  and  finer  word,  suggesting, 
as  it  does,  the  reference  of  the  matter  in  hand  to 
God's  wisdom  with  the  confidence  of  perfect  trust. 
The  latter  verb  is,  therefore,  more  naturally  used  of 
the  prayers  of  Jesus,  while  the  former  is  applied  to 
the  asking  of  gifts  and  favors  from  God  by  others. 
I  would  not  claim  that  this  distinction  can  always 
be  clearly  and  sharply  made,  but  only  that  as  applied 
to  prayer  to  God  in  John's  writings  it  is  at  least 
generally  observable. 


298  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

(  V)  Let  us  now  turn  to  our  second  topic,  —  the  refer- 
ences in  the  Fourth  Gospel  to  the  prayers  of  Christ. 
The  principal  relevant  passages  are  found  in  chap- 
ters xiv.,  xvi.,  and  xvii.  Jesus  describes  the  sending 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  following  upon  his  praying  the 
Father  to  send  him  (xiv.  16).  He  also  speaks  of  a 
time  when  he  will  tell  them  plainly  of  tlie  Father, 
and  adds:  "In  that  day  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name: 
and  I  say  not  unto  you  that  I  will  pray  the  Father 
for  you ;  for  the  Father  himself  loveth  you,  because 
ye  have  loved  me,  and  have  believed  that  I  came 
forth  from  the  Father  "  (xvi.  26,  27).  Jesus  will  pray, 
on  behalf  of  the  disciples,  that  the  Comforter  be 
sent  to  them;  when  he  is  come  he  will,  as  it  were, 
take  the  place  of  Christ,  continue  his  work,  and 
interpret  his  truth.  The  Comforter  will  come  in 
Christ's  name  (xiv.  26) ;  that  is,  the  sphere  and  aim 
of  Christ's  work  and  those  of  the  Comforter's  work 
will  be  the  same.  Now,  in  this  day  of  the  Spirit, 
this  time  of  fuller  revelation,  he  will,  through  the 
Spirit,  speak  to  his  disciples  concerning  God  more 
fully  and  frankly  than  he  had  done  before.  Previous 
to  this  time  of  greater  enlightenment  they  had  asked 
nothing  in  his  name  (xvi.  24) ;  that  is,  the  real 
spiritual  purport  and  aim  of  his  work  which  the 
"name"  connotes  had  not  been  disclosed  to  them; 
but  when  the  Spirit  comes  he  will  come  in  Christ's 
name,  —  that  is  to  say,  will  disclose  him  more  fully ; 
and  those  who  possess  the  Spirit  will  consequently 
ask  in  that  name, —  that  is,  with  the  right  spirit  and 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  299 

with  adequate  knowledge.  The  Spirit  who  repre- 
sents and  interprets  Christ  will,  so  to  speak,  initiate 
them  into  Christ,  so  that  they  will  both  ask  and 
receive  from  God  in  his  name  (xiv.  13;  xvi.  23). 
Through  the  possession  of  the  Spirit,  he  says,  my 
intercession  on  your  behalf  will  be  rendered  un- 
necessary; you  will  come  direct  to  God  in  the  illum- 
ination which  the  Spirit  will  bestow,  and  asking 
in  my  name,  holding  all  your  desires  and  requests 
subject  to  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  my  work  for  you, 
will  receive  from  God  the  fullest  answers  to  your 
prayers.  The  question  concerning  the  relation  be- 
tween the  statement  (xvi.  26)  "  In  that  day  ye  shall 
ask  in  my  name  "  and  the  assertion  in  a  preceding 
verse  (23),  "In  that  day  ye  shall  ask  me  nothing," 
will  meet  us  at  a  later  stage  of  our  discussion.  It 
may  here  be  noted  that  the  idea  which  is  presented 
in  the  last  half  of  verse  26,  that  Jesus  has  no  need 
to  speak  of  his  intercession  for  them  in  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  Spirit,  may  be  adjusted  to  his  assertion 
in  xiv.  16  and  xvii.  9,  that  he  prays  for  them,  on  the 
view  that  these  passages  are  general  and  refer  to 
the  time  prior  to  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  while  the 
prayer  referred  to  in  xvi.  26,  which,  it  is  said,  will 
be  rendered  unnecessary  by  the  Spirit's  illumina- 
tion, is  specific  intercession,  the  ends  of  which  will 
be  accomplished  by  the  Spirit's  work  in  believers. 
It  remains  to  notice,  under  this  head,  the  inter- 
cessory prayer  of  Jesus  for  his  disciples  in  chapter 
xvii.     In  that  prayer  he  prays  specifically  for  those 


300  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

who  have  believed  (xvii.  9),  and  for  them  who  shall 
believe  through  the  word  of  those  who  are  already 
disciples  (xvii.  20).  He  desires,  not  that  they 
should  be  taken  out  of  the  evil  world  by  death,  as 
he  himself  is  soon  to  be,  but  that  they  may  be  kept 
by  the  Father  from  the  power  of  the  evil  one  who  is 
the  prince  of  this  world.  In  the  quality  of  their  life 
they  are  not  akin  to  the  evil  world,  as  he  himself  is 
not;  they  share  his  own  life  and  spirit.  Jesus  asks 
that  they  may  be  set  apart  and  kept  in  the  power 
and  possession  of  the  truth  which  they  have  received 
from  him.  This  truth  of  his,  the  truth  which  he 
perfectly  embodies  and  reveals,  is  their  proper  life- 
element,  as  opposed  to  the  false  and  sinful  world. 
When  thus  consecrated  in  and  through  the  power  of 
the  truth  they  will  be  fit  media  for  conveying  the 
same  truth  to  others  and  for  communicating  to  them 
the  life  which  corresponds  to  truth.  Hence  Jesus 
adds :  "  As  thou  didst  send  me  into  the  world,  even 
so  sent  I  them  into  the  world"  (xvii.  18.)  The 
same  living  truth  which  he  has  given  to  them,  they 
are  to  bear  on  to  others.  He  has  set  himself  apart 
to  this  great  work  of  bringing  light  and  truth  to  men 
in  order  that  those  who  receive  it  should,  in  turn, 
become  bearers  of  light  and  channels  of  truth  to 
others.  Consecration  through  the  power  of  the 
truth,  the  embodiment  of  the  truth  in  life,  and  the 
expression  of  it  through  personal  example  and  influ- 
ence, —  this  is  the  first  great  desire  for  his  disciples 
which  Jesus  expresses  in  his  intercessory  prayer. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  301 

He  then  prays  for  the  unity  of  all  believers: 
"That  they  may  all  be  one;  even  as  thou,  Father, 
art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  in 
us :  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  didst  send 
me"  (xvii.  21).  Perfect  harmony  and  fellowship 
among  his  disciples,  like  that  which  exists  between 
the  Father  and  himself,  would,  he  implies,  be  effect- 
ive in  convincing  the  world  of  his  divine  mission. 
If  his  spirit  could  heal  the  divisions  and  harmonize 
the  discords  of  earth,  such  a  result  would  prove  the 
most  convincing  possible  evidence  of  the  divineness 
of  his  work.  He  came  to  bring  to  the  world  the 
true  principle  and  bond  of  brotherhood  among  men, 
—  love.  The  work  of  love  bears  within  itself  its 
own  attestation.  Wherever  men  make  it  the  guiding 
light  of  their  lives,  it  commends  itself  to  all  with 
irresistible  power  as  divine  in  its  source  and  as 
divinely  adapted  to  secure  the  best  good  for  man. 
From  the  idea  of  unity  among  men  through  his  in- 
dwelling in  them  (xvii.  23)  the  thought  of  Jesus 
mounts  up  to  dwell  upon  their  perfect  union  with 
him  and  with  the  Father  through  love,  reaching  its 
culmination  in  the  words :  "  that  the  love  wherewith 
thou  lovedst  me  may  be  in  them,  and  I  in  them  " 
(xvii.   26). 

This  intercession  was  special  in  its  import  and 
purpose.  It  does  not  have  in  view  the  world  in 
general:  "I  pray  not  for  the  world,  but  for  those 
whom  thou  hast  given  me  "  (xvii.  9).  He  asks  bless- 
ings for  them  which,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  could 


302  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

not  be  received  by  the  world.  He  commends  his 
disciples  to  God  for  special  guidance  and  favor  since 
they  have  shown  a  disposition  to  receive  the  truth 
and  to  live  righteously.  They  have  special  needs, 
special  capacities,  and  special  claims  upon  the  pater- 
nal sympathy  of  God.  The  exclusion  of  the  world 
from  this  particular  intercession  has  the  effect  to 
emphasize  the  higher  relation  in  which  those  who 
have  received  the  Son  and  his  message  stand  to  the 
Father.  It  does  not  imply  any  limit  in  the  love  and 
interest  of  Christ  for  the  world.  In  the  same  prayer 
he  expresses  the  desire  that  through  the  consecration 
and  unity  which  he  is  now  seeking  for  his  disciples 
the  world  may  be  led  to  believe  (xvii.  21).  Just  as 
earnestly  as  Jesus  here  seeks  special  grace  for  those 
who  had  responded  to  his  call,  would  he  at  other 
times  pray  for  the  conversion  of  the  world  which  he 
had  come  to  save  (i.  29;  iii.  16;  iv.  42;  xii.  47). 
5^  Our  third  theme  is,  the  prayers  of  the  disciples. 
The  first  inquiry  which  arises  is,  What  is  meant  by 
prayer  in  Christ's  name  ?  We  have  already  observed 
how  Jesus  said :  "  Hitherto, "  that  is,  previous  to  the 
gift  of  the  Spirit,  "have  ye  asked  nothing  in  my 
name  "  (xvi.  24).  He  then  proceeds  to  assure  them 
that  in  the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit  they  shall  ask 
in  his  name  (xvi.  26).  Clearly,  therefore,  prayer 
"  in  his  name  "  involves  some  higher  element,  and 
this  element  is  the  result  of  the  gift  and  illumina- 
tion of  the  Spirit.  It  is  a  part  of  that  fuller  bless- 
ing which  the  Spirit  is  to  bring,  and  which  makes  it 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  303 

expedient  that  Jesus  should  go  away  in  order  that 
the  Spirit  may  come  to  apply  and  perpetuate  his 
work  (xvi.  7).  The  capacity  to  pray  to  the  Father 
in  Christ's  name  results  from  that  fuller  enlighten- 
ment and  more  profound  experience  in  Christian  life 
to  which  Jesus  refers  in  saying  that  the  Spirit  will 
bear  witness  of  him,  will  guide  the  disciples  into  all 
the  truth,  and  will  take  of  his  and  declare  it  unto 
them  (xv.  26;  xvi.  18,  14).  Further  light  is  thrown 
upon  the  expression  in  question  by  the  statement 
that  (according  to  the  best  text)  the  Father  gave  to 
Jesus  his  own  "name"  to  make  known  to  the  world; 
"  in  thy  name  which  thou  hast  given  me  "  {ev  tm  ovo- 
[xarC  (Tov  w  BeScoKci';  /xoi,  xvii.  11) ;  "  I  made  known 
unto  them  thy  name,  and  will  make  it  known" 
(xvii.  26,  cf.  6).  The  "name"  of  God  is,  according 
to  a  Hebrew  method  of  thought,  a  symbol  for  God's 
nature.  The  Father  gives  to  the  Son  his  name  to 
manifest  to  men  in  the  sense  that  he  commissions 
the  Son  to  reveal  himself  as  he  truly  is,  to  disclose 
his  nature,  thought,  and  feeling  more  adequately 
than  they  had  ever  been  disclosed.  This  manifesta- 
tion of  God  Christ  makes  to  the  world  in  his  own 
person.  He  reveals  to  men,  through  the  whole  power 
and  spirit  of  his  life  and  work,  the  grace,  the  love, 
and  the  fatherliness  of  God. 

What,  then,  is  the  force  of  the  sayings,  "  If  ye 
shall  ask  [me]  anything  in  my  name,  that  will  I  do  " 
(xiv.  14) ;  "  That  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  of  the 
Father  in  my  name,  he  may  give  it  you  "  (xv.  16)  ? 


304  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Place  beside  these  assurances  another  in  which  dif- 
ferent terms  are  used :  "  If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my 
words  abide  in  you,  ask  whatsoever  ye  will,  and  it 
shall  be  done  unto  you"  (xv.  7).  To  ask  in  Christ's 
name  must,  therefore,  be  practically  equivalent  to 
asking  while  abiding  in  him,  and  while  his  words 
are  abiding  in  the  petitioner,  that  is,  to  ask  in  him, 
in  his  spirit,  in  accord  with  the  whole  aim  of  his 
work  for  and  in  the  believer.^  It  should  be  noted, 
in  addition  to  what  has  been  said,  that  the  Spirit 
himself  who,  through  his  teaching  and  guidance, 
leads  believers  into  that  experimental  knowledge  of 
Christ  and  his  work  which  enables  them  to  pray  in 
his  name,  is  said  to  be  sent  in  his  name  (xiv.  26), 
and  also  that  God  is  said  to  answer  prayer  in 
Christ's  name :  "  If  ye  shall  ask  anything  of  the 
Father,  he  will  give  it  you  in  my  name "  (xvi.  23). 
Thus  it  is  seen  that  the  phrase  which  we  are  consid- 
ering is  very  comprehensive.  The  Spirit  is  sent, 
prayer  is  offered,  and  the  answer  is  given  in  Christ's 
name.  The  person  and  work  of  Christ  sum  up  in 
themselves  the  whole  gracious  purpose  and  proceed- 
ing of  God  for  man's  salvation  and  spiritual  growth. 
All  that  God  does  for  us  is  held  within  the  scope  of 
that  revelation  of  God  and  communication  of  divine 
life  to  men  which  Jesus  accomplishes.     The  perpetu- 

1  The  import  of  the  term  "  name  "  as  a  symbol  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  may  be  more  fully  tested  by  consulting  the  following 
passages :  i.  12 ;  ii.  23 ;  iii.  IS ;  v.  43 ;  x.  25 ;  xii.  13 ;  and 
XX.  31. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  305 

ation  of  the  work  of  salvation  in  the  world  through 
the  ministry  of  the  Spirit  and  the  fostering  and 
strengthening  of  spiritual  life  through  answers  to 
prayer,  stand  in  direct  connection  with  Christ's  per- 
son and  work.  The  significance  and  end  of  his  work 
are  normative  for  all  divine  action  in  redemption 
and  sanctification.  As  applied  to  prayer,  therefore, 
the  phrase  "  in  his  name,"  implies  a  right  apprecia- 
tion of  Christ  as  revealing  God  to  man  and  as  re- 
vealing man  to  himself,  and  a  right  relation  to  this 
saving  work.  Bishop  Westcott  has  this  comment 
"  The  meaning  of  the  phrase  '  in  my  name '  is  '  as 
being  one  with  me,  even  as  1  am  revealed  to  you.' 
Its  two  correlatives  are  in  me  (vi.  56  ;  xiv.  20 ;  xv. 
4  sq.;  xvi.  33;  cf.  I.  v.  20),  and  the  Pauline  in 
Christ.  .  .  .  Augustine  remarks  that  the  prayer  in 
Christ's  name  must  be  consistent  with  Christ's  char- 
acter, and  that  he  fulfils  it  as  Saviour,  and  therefore 
just  so  far  as  it  conduces  to  salvation."  ^ 

The  question  now  arises.  How  can  we  adjust  the 
statements  that  in  the  day  of  the  Spirit  the  disciples 
shall  ask  in  his  name  (xvi.  26),  and  that  if  they  shall 
ask  him  anything  in  his  name  he  will  do  it  (xiv.  14), 
with  the  assertion  that  in  the  day  when  he  has  de- 
parted and  the  Spirit  is  come  they  shall  ask  him 
nothing  (xvi.  23  a).  It  is  noticeable  that  in  this 
last  passage  it  is  the  verb  ipcordv  which  is  used  to 
describe  the  asking  of  the  disciples.  The  Greek  is : 
Kal  iv  i/c€LVr)  Trj  -^f^epa  i/xe  ovk  epdOTifjcreTe  ovhev.     The 

^  Commentary,  in  loco,  xiv.  13. 
20 


306  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

common  view  is  that  the  word  ipcordv  in  this  passage 
has  its  proper  classical  signification  (frequent  also 
in  John  and  in  the  New  Testament  generally),  to  in- 
quire, to  ask  a  question  ;  and  that  the  meaning  of  the 
statement  is :  In  the  time  when  you  become  enlightened 
by  the  Spirit  you  will  ask  me  no  such  questions  as 
you  have  been  doing  :  "  How  know  we  the  way  ?  "  (xiv. 
5.)  "  Whither  goest  thou  ?  "  (xvi.  5.)  "  What  is  this 
that  he  saith,  A  little  while  ? "  (xvi.  18.)  Others  under- 
stand it  to  mean,  to  rnaJce  request  of  me  in  prai/er. 
On  the  former  view  the  statement  stands  directly  con- 
nected with  verse  19  :  "  Jesus  perceived  that  they  were 
desirous  to  ask  him  (jj6e\ov  avrov  ipcorav),  and  he 
said  unto  them,  Do  ye  inquire  among  yourselves  con- 
cerning this,  that  I  said,  A  little  while,  and  ye  behold 
me  not,  and  again  a  little  while,  and  ye  shall  see 
me?"  With  this  meaning  corresponds  also  the  use 
of  ipcordv  in  verse  30.  This  view  avoids  the  diffi- 
culty of  applying  ipcordv  in  this  one  passage  to  the 
prayers  of  the  disciples,  whereas  elsewhere  in  John  it 
is  applied  to  the  prayers  of  Jesus  only.  Another  , 
consideration  favoring  the  meaning  inqitire  rather 
than  request  in  our  passage  is  that  otherwise  the 
statement  here  seems  to  clash  with  that  found  in 
xiv.  14,  especially  in  case  the  pronoun  one  (/xe)  is 
genuine,  as  it  probably  is.  In  the  case  just  supposed 
we  should  have  in  xvi.  23  the  statement  that  in  the 
dispensation  of  the  Spirit  the  disciples  should  address 
no  prayer  to  Jesus,  while  in  xiv.  14  he  says  that  if 
they  ask  him  anything  in  his  name,  he  will   do  it. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  307 

On  the  more  common  interpretation  of  ipcorrjaeTe 
the  meaning  of  verses  23,  24  is  well  given  in 
Godet's  paraphrase :  "  You  will  no  longer  address 
your  questions  to  me,  as  when  I  was  visibly  with 
you  ;  and  in  general  I  declare  to  you  that,  as  to 
what  you  may  have  need  of,  you  will  be  able,  be- 
cause of  the  communion  established  henceforth  through 
the  Holy  Spirit  between  yourselves  and  the  Father, 
to  address  yourselves  directly  to  him."  ^ 

To  this  interpretation  of  ipcoTija-ere  it  is,  however, 
objected  that  it  unduly  separates  the  two  parts  of 
verse  23.  Trench,  indeed,  affirms  that  "  every  one 
competent  to  judge  is  agreed  that  '  ye  shall  ask '  of 
the  first  half  of  the  verse  has  nothing  to  do  with 
'  ye  shall  ask '  of  the  second."  ^  But  it  is  certainly 
unusual  for  the  two  parts  of  a  verse  to  "  have  nothing 
to  do  with "  each  other,  especially  where  a  certain 
definite  subject  is  being  consecutively  presented. 
Moreover,  it  is  observed  that  in  the  sentence  under 
review  the  pronoun  me  (e/ie)  is  emphatic  both  in 
form  and  by  position.  This  emphasis  seems  to  imply 
that  it  stands  in  contrast  with  some  other  personal 
term.  What,  then,  is  its  correlative  ?  On  the  former 
interpretation,  which  separates  the  two  parts  of  the 
verse,  no  antithesis  is  expressed.  It  may  be  supplied 
in  some  such  way  as  this :  In  the  time  of  the  Spirit 
ye  shall  ask  wg  no  questions,  but  the  Spirit  will  teach 
you ;  or,  you  shall,  instead  of  asking  me,  have  direct 

^  Commentary,  in  loco,  xvi.  23. 

2  Synonyms  of  the  Nezo  Testament,  p.  143. 


308  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

access  to  the  Father  in  prayer.  But  it  is  urged  that 
by  assigning  to  epwTrjaeTe  the  meaning  ye  shall  re- 
quest, the  two  parts  of  the  verse  are  brought  into 
natural  connection,  and  the  correlative  to  the  em- 
phatic pronoun  me  of  23  a  is  found  in  the  Father  of 
23  h.  In  that  case  the  verse  would  mean :  In  that 
day  you  shall  indeed  make  no  requests  of  me,  as  you 
have  been  doing  during  my  visible  presence  with  you, 
but  you  may  go  direct  to  the  Father,  and  he  will 
give  you  whatever  you  need  in  my  name.  Dr.  Ezra 
Abbot  also  raises,  on  behalf  of  this  view,  this  ques- 
tion :  Why  should  our  Saviour  say  that  wlien  he  was 
gone  from  earth  and  the  Spirit  had  come,  they  should 
ash  him  no  questioiis  ?  Why  should  he  tell  them  that 
they  would  not  do  what,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  was 
impossible  ?  ^ 

These  considerations  seem  to  me  to  be  overbalanced 
by  those  which  favor  the  former  interpretation.  It 
might  be  said  of  the  disciples  that  they  would  ask 
him  no  such  questions  in  that  day  as  they  had  been 
asking,  if   the    meaning   were  that  they  would   not 

1  The  student  may  be  interested  to  see  how  modern  com- 
mentators stand  divided  on  the  interpretation  of  epcorijcreTe.  I 
have  accordingly  made  a  list  of  representative  scliolars  on 
either  side.  In  favor  of  the  meaning  ask  no  questions,  are  Tho- 
liiclv,  LUcke,  DeWette,  Alford,  Trench,  Lange,  Meyer,  Godet, 
Westcott,  H.  Holtzmann,  and  Phimmer.  Favoring  the  meaning 
make  request,  are  E.  Abbot,  Weizsacker,  Weiss,  O.  Holtzmann. 
The  views  of  older  interpreters  and  of  lexicographers  are  given 
in  Dr.  Ezra  Abbot's  article  on  "  The  distinction  betiveen  alTi<o  and 
epwTaco,"  in  his   Critical  Essays. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  309 

harbor  them  in  their  minds,  or  that  they  would  not 
bring  them  to  him  in  prayer.  Moreover,  the  emphasis 
on  the  pronoun  me  may  be  naturally  explained  in  the 
words  of  President  Dwight :  "  The  real  force  of  this 
emphatic  eycte  is  this,  that  their  permanent  joy  was  to 
be  connected  with  a  new  intercourse  with  the  Divine 
Being,  not  that  of  questions  presented  to  him,  but  of 
prayers  offered  to  Qod  the  Father  in  his  name."  ^  If, 
then,  the  meaning  ask  7io  questions  (such  as  you  have 
been  asking)  be  assigned  to  ipforijaere  the  passage 
xvi.  23  a  will  furnish  no  special  difficulty  when  set 
alongside  of  the  clear  implication  in  xvi.  14  that, 
after  his  departure  from  earth,  his  disciples  will  make 
requests  of  him.  It  should  also  be  noticed  that  the 
word  for  "  ask  "  in  xvi.  23  b  is  alrelv.  This  fact,  I  think, 
lends  probability  to  the  view  that  in  the  first  part  of 
the  verse  epwrav  has  a  sense  specifically  different 
from  alrelv  in  the  second  part.  Otherwise  the  change 
of  verbs  would  have  no  apparent  motive,  while  if 
ipcordv  in  23  a  means  to  ask  questions,  the  use  of  dif- 
ferent words  in  the  two  clauses  is  naturally  explained. 
On  neither  interpretation  of  ipcoTT^aere  is  there  any 
conflict  with  xvi.  26.  If  the  asking  in  the  two  pas- 
sages is  specifically  different,  there  can  be  no  conflict, 
because  there  is  no  direct  relation.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  asking  is  the  same  in  kind  in  the  two  cases, 
there  is  no  inconsistency,  because  in  xvi.  23  a  an  ask- 
ing from   Christ  (as  contrasted  with  the  Father)  is 

^  Notes  appended  to  Godet's  Commentnrii,  in  loco,  xvi.  23. 


310  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

denied,  while  in  xvi.  26  an  asking  directly  from  the 
Father  is  affirmed. 

(I' -In  conclusion,  let  us  observe  the  terms  of  the 
assurances  which  are  given  that  prayer  will  be  an- 
swered. The  language  in  which  these  assurances  are 
expressed  is  very  strong,  and  might  seem,  at  first 
sight,  to  imply  that  whatever  is  asked  will  be  given. 
But  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  asking  is  required  to 
be  in  Christ's  name  :  "  Whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my 
name,  that  will  I  do,  that  the  Father  may  be  glorified 
in  the  Son.  If  ye  shall  ask  me  anything  in  my  name, 
that  will  I  do"  (xiv.  13,  14),  Moreover,  the  answer- 
ing of  prayer  is  also  said  to  take  place  in  Christ's 
name :  "  If  ye  shall  ask  anything  of  the  Father,  he 
will  give  it  you  in  my  name  "  (xvi.  23).  It  is  quite 
certain  that  in  this  passage  the  phrase  "  in  my  name  " 
should  be  connected  with  the  phrase  "  he  will  give  " 
instead  of  with  the  phrase  "  if  ye  shall  ask."  The 
other  order,  which  is  found  in  the  Textus  Receptus,  is 
opposed  to  the  reading  of  the  best  manuscripts,  and 
is  probably  due  to  a  tendency  to  conform  this  passage 
to  xiv.  13  and  xv.  16.  Prayer,  then,  is  to  be  offered, 
as  it  will  be  answered,  in  Christ's  name.  This  phrase 
involves  certain  conditions  and  limitations  affecting 
prayer.  It  implies  that  we  are  to  ask  in  Christ's 
spirit,  —  the  spirit  of  submission  and  trust,  —  and  in 
accord  with  the  nature  and  aim  of  Christ's  work  for 
us.  It  excludes  the  idea  that  human  desires  can  give 
the  law  to  the  divine  order  and  that  the  human  will 
can  become  determining  for  the  divine.     The  import 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PRAYER  311 

of  prayer  in  Christ's  name  is  well  indicated  in  such 
passages  as  I.  v.  14 :  "  If  we  ask  anything  according 
to  his  will,  he  heareth  us,"  and  xv.  7  :  "If  ye  abide  in 
me,  and  my  words  abide  in  you,  ask  whatsoever  ye 
will,  and  it  shall  be  done  unto  you." 

The  assurances  that  whatsoever  is  asked  shall  be 
given  are  conditioned  upon  abiding  in  Christ,  that  is, 
upon  the  possession  of  a  spirit  in  prayer  like  that 
which  characterized  him.  Prayer  for  him  was  sub- 
mission to  God's  will.  "  Not  my  will,  but  thine,  be 
done,"  is  the  epitome  of  all  his  requests.  His  was 
the  prayerful  life^  and  to  the  test  of  that  life  we  must 
bring  all  our  ideas  on  the  subject.  The  promise  that 
God  will  give  whatsoever  we  ask,  is  applicable  within 
the  sphere  of  Christ's  work  for  us.  So  far  as  prayer 
is  "  in  his  name  "  it  shall  be  answered ;  so  far  as  the 
petitioner  "  abides "  in  Christ,  he  shall  receive  his 
requests.  The  whole  practical  import  of  Jesus'  teach- 
ing concerning  prayer  which  John  has  preserved,  is 
well  reflected  in  the  words  of  the  collect  which  asks 
that  the  Lord  will  hear  the  prayers  of  his  servants, 
and  adds :  "  and  that  they  may  obtain  their  petitions, 
make  them  to  ask  such  things  as  shall  please  thee." 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE   DOCTRINE    OF   ETERNAL   LIFE 

Literature. — Wendt  :  Teaching  of  Jesus,  Eternal  life  in 
the  Johannine  discourses,  i.  242-248  (orig.  pp.  188-193) ; 
Weiss  :  Joliann.  Lehrh.,  Der  BegrifE  des  ewigen  Lebens,  pp,  1- 
11,  and  Bibl.  Theol,  Christ  the  Life  of  the  World,  ii.  347-352 
(orig.  pp.  614-618)  ;  Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Theol,  Of  Life,  ii. 
492-505  (orig.  ii.  549-564)  ;  Westcott  :  The  Ejnstles  of  St. 
John,  The  idea  of  Life,  pp.  214-218 ;  Baur  :  Neutest.  Theol., 
Das  ewige  Leben  als  Gegenwart  und  Ziikunft,  pp.  403,  404 ; 
Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Himmelreich  und  ewiges  Leben,  i. 
262-264. 

The  passages  and  topics  which  are  to  be  con- 
sidered under  the  heading  "  Eternal  Life  "  are  closely- 
akin  to  those  which  we  have  already  studied  under 
the  title,  "The  Origin  and  Nature  of  the  Spiritual 
Life  "  (chapter  X).  It  has  seemed  to  me,  however, 
that  there  was  enough  that  wns  distinctive  in  the 
teaching  concerning  eternal  life  to  entitle  it  to  a 
separate  treatment. 

"Eternal  life,"  or  "life"  in  the  absolute  sense,  is 
a  name  for  the  heavenly  good  which  Jesus  brings  to 
men  in  the  gospel;  it  is  conferred  upon  men  upon 
condition  of  faith  in  him.  It  is  noticeable  that  in 
the  Johannine  writings  it  is  usually  described  as  a 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  313 

present  possession  of  believers.  In  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  in  which  the  term  is  less  frequently  used, 
it  has  a  future  reference,  as  in  Mark  x.  30,  and  the 
parallel  passage,  Luke  xviii.  30,  where  "  eternal  life" 
stands  in  contrast  to  "this  time" :  "He  shall  receive 
a  hundredfold  now  in  this  time,  .  .  .  and  in  the 
world  to  come  eternal  life."  In  John,  however, 
emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  view  that  the  believer 
already  has  eternal  life,  —  an  idea  which,  in  other 
forms,  is  abundantly  recognized  in  the  Synoptists. 
We  read,  for  example,  in  the  Fourth  Gospel :  "  He 
that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  him  that  sent 
me,  hath  eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment, 
but  hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life.  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is, 
when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God ;  and  they  that  hear  shall  live  "  (v.  24,  25). 
And  again :  "  He  that  believeth  hath  eternal  life  " 
(vi.  47) ;  "  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my 
blood  hath  eternal  life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at 
the  last  day  "  (vi.  54).  From  passages  like  this  just 
quoted,  however,  (cf.  vi.  40)  we  see  that  eternal 
life,  though  a  present  possession  of  the  Christian, 
looks  forward  to  the  "  last  day"  for  its  completion ; 
and  thus  we  find  in  John  a  combination  of  pres- 
ent and  future  references  which  corresponds  sub- 
stantially to  the  twofold  representation  by  the 
Synoptists  of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  both  present 
and  future. 

What,  now,  is  this  great  gift,  this  heavenly  bene- 


314  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

fit,  which  is  called  "  eternal  life  "  ?  In  the  opinion 
of  many  interpreters  we  find  in  xvii.  3  a  description 
of  its  nature:  "And  this  is  life  eternal,  that  they 
should  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and  him  whom 
thou  didst  send,  even  Jesus  Christ."  Weiss  says 
that  this  passage  states  "wherein  the  essence  of 
eternal  life  consists,"  and  Westcott  affirms  that 
"the  definition  is  of  the  essence  of  eternal  life,"  and 
the  same  general  position  is  taken  by  the  great 
majority  of  commentators.  But  those  who  hold  that 
we  have  here  a  definition  of  eternal  life  are  not 
wholly  agreed  as  to  what  it  is  defined  to  be.  One 
point  of  difference  concerns  the  force  of  'iva,  k.  t.  \., 
rendered,  "that  they  should  know,"  etc.  The  two 
scholars  just  quoted  take  different  views  of  this 
phrase.  Weiss  argues  that  just  because  the  clause 
"that  they  should  know,"  etc.,  describes  the  nature 
of  eternal  life,  it  is  impossible  that  the  connective 
(iW)  can  have  the  telic  force.  The  clause  in  ques- 
tion, he  contends,  states  the  content  of  eternal  life, 
and  cannot,  therefore,  be  a  clause  of  purpose. 
Westcott,  however,  ingeniously  says:  "Eternal  life 
lies  not  so  much  in  the  possession  of  a  completed 
knowledge  as  in  the  striving  after  a  growing  knowl- 
edge. The  that  (tW)  expresses  an  aim,  an  end,  and 
not  only  a  fact.  So,  too,  the  tense  of  the  verb 
(yivcoarKcoai)  marks  continuance,  progress,  and  not  a 
perfect  and  past  apprehension  gained  once  for  all." 
I  cannot  but  regard  this  view  of  Westcott  as  over- 
subtle,  and,  in  general,  on  the  force  of  iva  in  such 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  315 

passages  {cf.  iv.  34;  vi.  29,  39,  40;  xv.  12;  xviii.  39) 
I  prefer  the  view  of  Weiss.  ^ 

But  apart  from  this  point,  and  on  the  assumption 
that  eternal  life  consists  in  the  knowledge  of  God 
and  of  Christ,  there  is  room  for  considerable  differ- 
ence of  view  on  the  question.  What  is  the  nature  of 
this  knowledge  which  is  eternal  life  ?  How  much 
does  it  include  ?  Is  it  to  be  understood  as  being 
absolutely  synonymous  with  eternal  life,  or  as  being 
its  root  or  subjective  principle,  as  Liicke  and  Meyer 
maintain  ?  This  last  mode  of  viewing  the  passage 
is  but  a  step  removed  from  a  second  general  method 
of  interpretation  which  sees  in  it,  not  a  statement 
of  the  nature  of  eternal  life,  but  an  assertion  of  the 
condition  .on  which  eternal  life  is  attained.  We  find 
that  John  frequently  represents  Jesus  as  identify- 
ing a  result  with  the  means  or  agent  by  which  it  is 
obtained.  Accordingly,  he  is  the  resurrection  and 
the  life  (xi.  25),  that  is,  the  means  whereby  these 
are  secured  to  men.  Similarly  he  is  said  to  be  the 
way,  the  truth,  and  the  life  (xiv.  6),  and  his  "  words  " 
and  "  commandment "  are  said  to  be  eternal  life 
(vi.  63;  xii.  50),  where  the  meaning  must  be  that 
they  are  the  means  or  condition  of  securing  eternal 
life.  In  view  of  this  Johannine  "pregnant  mode 
of  expression"  Wendt  infers  that  "Jesus  is  not 
there  (xvii.  3)  stating  wherein  eternal  life  consists 

1  Cf.  Burton,  New  Testament  Moods  and  Tenses,  §  213.  The 
views  of  Weiss  and  Westcott  are  quoted  from  their  Commen- 
taries on  xvii.  3. 


316  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

as   to  its   essence,    but   wherein    lies    the    means    of 
ohtahmig  it. "  ^ 

A  similar  view  of  our  passage  is  maintained  by 
Bejschlag,  who  holds  that  it  would  have  been  incon- 
gruous for  Jesus  to  define  the  nature  of  eternal  life 
in  his  intercessory  prayer,  while  the  phrase  is  fre- 
quently used  elsewhere  in  his  teaching  without 
formal  definition.  He  therefore  holds  that  the 
words,  "that  they  may  know  thee,"  etc.,  are  in- 
tended to  indicate  in  what  way  and  by  what  means 
Jesus  imparts  eternal  life,  and  that  the  phrase 
"  this  is  eternal  life  "  is  used  in  the  sense  of  "  there- 
upon rests,"  or  "thereby  is  mediated  eternal  life." 
He  further  holds  that  the  nature  of  eternal  life 
required  no  formal  definition,  since  it  is  made 
sufficiently  evident  by  its  contrast  with  death  (v.  24) 
and  destruction  (iii,  16),  and  by  the  figures  by 
which  its  bestowment  is  described,  such  as  "the 
bread  of  life "  and  "  living  water  "  (vi.  35 ;  iv.  10- 
14;  vii.  37),  and  concludes:  "The  life  is  just  that 
true,  perfectly  satisfying,  blessed  life  which  flows 
into  the  soul  of  man  from  communion  with  God. "  ^ 

^   Teaching  of  Jesus,  i.  244  (orig.  p.  190). 

2  Neutest.  TheoL,  i.  263,  264.  In  a  note  appended  to  the 
passage  summarized  above,  Beyschlag  characterizes  Weiss's 
view,  that  in  xvii.  3  the  nature  of  eternal  life  is  defined  as  con- 
sisting in  the  knowledge  of  God,  thus  :  "  An  erroneous  concep- 
tion, which  is  carried  so  far  that  he  (Weiss)  says  (Bibl.  Theol., 
p.  663,  Eng.  tr.  ii.  411),  with  reference  to  v.  26  and  vi.  57  :  'As 
the  Father  and  the  Son  are  one,  because  there  is  common  to 
them  the  life  of  the  complete  knowledge  of  God,' "etc.,  —  an 
interpretation  which,  naturally  enough,  leads  Beyschlag  to 
exclaim:  "Die  voile  Gotteserkenntniss  Gottes?" 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL  LIFE  317 

While  it  seems  to  me  improbable  that  Jesus  in- 
tended, in  the  passage  under  review,  to  give  a  de- 
finition of  the  nature  of  eternal  life,  it  is  none  the 
less  true,  as  Beyschlag  affirms,  that  eternal  life  and 
the  knowledge  of  God  are  closely  related  concep- 
tions. If  this  knovrledge  is  thought  of  as  a  condi- 
tion of  possessing  eternal  life,  it  is  still  vitally  and 
essentially  related  to  that  life.  It  is  necessary, 
therefore,  in  seeking  the  meaning  of  "  eternal  life,"  to' 
determine  as  accurately  as  possible  what  this  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  of  Christ  fairly  includes.  The 
question  has  already  been  touched  upon  in  our  dis- 
cussion of  the  idea  of  God  and  of  the  way  in  which 
God  is  known  (pp.  65-67). 

It  seems  to  me  certain  that  by  the  knowledge  in 
question  is  meant  a  vital  and  practical  apprehension 
of  God  in  his  true  character  as  he  is  revealed  in 
Christ.  It  is  not  a  mere  intellectual  conviction,  but 
an  appropriation  of  God  to  the  heart  and  life  by  the 
whole  nature ;  it  is  such  a  spiritual  intuition  of  God, 
such  a  laying  hold  upon  the  revelation  of  him  as  dis- 
closed in  Christ,  as  makes  him  the  supreme  object 
and  determining  power  in  life.  In  this  view  most 
interpreters  of  John  are  substantially  agreed;  it 
accords  with  a  quality  of  John's  thinking  which  we 
noticed  in  our  opening  chapter,  — that  is,  the  ten- 
dency to  contemplate  all  the  powers  of  the  indi- 
vidual in  their  unity,  and  so  to  regard  the  total  man 
as  involved  in  all  his  acts  and  choices.  Weiss 
admits  the  view  stated  above,  but  stops  short  of  con- 


318  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

ceding  Luther's  claim  that  the  idea  of  inward  fellow- 
ship {mtiere  Gemeinschaft)  is  involved  in  the  term.^ 
This  seems  to  be  an  effort  to  make  a  distinction 
where  there  is  no  real  difference.  If,  as  Weiss  says, 
this  knowledge  is  "  a  spiritual  beholding,  a  sinking 
of  one's  self  into  the  highest  object  of  knowledge  by 
means  of  which  it  is  inwardly  appropriated  and 
elevated  so  as  to  become  the  determining  central 
point  of  the  whole  spiritual  life,  "^  it  must  involve 
an  inward  fellowship  with  God.  The  simplest  way 
of  testing  the  correctness  of  this  opinion  is  to  review 
some  of  the  more  important  passages  in  John,  where 
he  speaks  of  the  knowledge  of  God  or  of  Christ. 

Let  us  first  notice  several  passages  in  which  the 
possession  of  this  knowledge  is  denied,  and  observe 
the  class  of  persons  who  are  said  7iot  to  have  it,  and 
the  grounds  on  which  they  are  so  described.  The 
"world"  is  said  not  to  have  known  the  true  light 
which  was  shining  in  its  darkness,  and  this  saying  is 
illustrated  and  enforced  by  reference  to  the  rejection 
of  Christ  by  the  Jews  (i.  10,  11).  Jesus  tells  the 
hostile  and  wicked  Jews  that  they  have  not  known 
God,  and  adds,  "but  I  know  him"  (viii.  55).  It  is 
obvious  that  as  his  is  the  knowledge  of  personal 
intimacy  or  fellowship,  so  their  lack  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  is  due  to  their  moral  unlikeness  to  God 
and  want  of  sympathy  with  his  will.  In  xiv.  7 
Jesus  says  to  the  disciples:  "If  ye  had  known  me, 

^  Commentary,  in  loco,  note  (p.  544). 
2  Commentary,  in  loco. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  319 

ye  would  have  known  my  Father  also,"  and  the  con- 
versation which  ensued  shows  very  clearly  that  it  is 
through  the  deeper  apprehension  of  his  person  and 
through  closer  unity  with  his  life  that  they  were  to 
know  the  Father.  In  this  connection  the  Spirit  is 
promised,  who  shall  unveil  Christ  and  his  truth  to 
them  that  they  may  thereby  know  God.  But  some, 
he  says,  have  no  affinity  for  the  Spirit.^  The  world 
cannot  receive  him,  "for  it  beholdeth  him  not, 
neither  knoweth  him :  ye  know  him ;  for  he  abideth 
with  you,  and  shall  be  in  you"  (xiv.  17).  The  Jews 
will  persecute  the  disciples,  said  Jesus,  "and  these 
things  will  they  do,  because  they  have  not  known  the 
Father,  nor  me  "  (xvi.  3).  The  sinful  world  knew 
not  God,  but  Jesus  knew  him  and  made  him  known 
to  men,  and  will  continue  to  make  him  known;  and 
what  is  the  aim  of  that  knowledge  ?  "  That  the 
love  wherewith  thou  lovedst  me  may  be  in  them, 
and  I  in  them"  (xvii.  26).  These  passages  show 
how  inseparable  is  the  knowledge  of  God  from  the 
life  of  love  in  fellowship  with  God.  Several  pas- 
sages in  the  First  Epistle  emphasize  the  same  con- 
nection of  ideas:  "For  this  cause  the  world  knoweth 
us  not,  because  it  knew  him  not"  (1.  iii.  1).  "He 
that  loveth  not  knoweth  not  God ;  for  God  is  love  " 
(I.  iv.  8). 

So  far,  therefore,  as  eternal  life  consists  in,  or  is 
dependent  upon,  a  knowledge  of  God,  there  is  in- 
volved in  it  a  spiritual  fellowship  with  God.  It 
makes  little  practical  difference  whether  we  regard 


320  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

xvii.  3  as  a  formal  definition  of  eternal  life  or  as  a 
statement  of  the  method  of  its  attainment.  The 
conditions  of  entering  the  kingdom  of  God  are  also 
conditions  of  continuing  to  participate  in  its  bene- 
fits. Humility,  meekness,  hunger  and  thirst  after 
righteousness,  and  kindred  qualities  are  as  truly 
characteristics  of  the  member  of  the  kingdom  as 
they  are  conditions  of  his  becoming  such.  What, 
then,  is  eternal  life  ?  It  is  the  fulfilment  of  man's 
true  destiny  in  fellowship  with  God  as  revealed  in 
Jesus  Christ;  it  is  life  after  the  divine  pattern,  — 
Christ-like  life.  It  is  the  correspondence  of  man  to 
his  true  idea,  the  realization  of  that  sort  of  charac- 
ter of  which  Christ  is  the  type.  After  a  careful 
collation  of  all  the  passages  in  which  John  presents 
the  idea  of  life,  Bishop  Westcott  sums  up  their  sig- 
nificance in  the  following  statement:  — 

''If  now  we  endeavor  to  bring  together  the  different 
traits  of  '  the  eternal  Ufe,'  we  see  that  it  is  a  life  which, 
with  all  its  fulness  and  all  its  potencies,  is  7iotv ;  a  life 
wnich  extends  be3^ond  the  limits  of  the  individual,  and 
preserves,  completes,  crowns  individuality  by  placing  the 
part  in  connection  with  the  whole  ;  a  life  which  satisfies 
while  it  quickens  aspiration  ;  a  life  which  is  seen,  as  we 
regard  it  patiently,  to  be  capable  of  conquering,  recon- 
ciling, uniting  the  rebeUious,  discordant,  broken  elements 
of  being  on  which  we  look  and  which  we  bear  about  with 
us  ;  a  life  which  gives  unity  to  the  constituent  parts  and 
to  the  complex  whole,  which  brings  together  heaven  and 
earth,  which  offers  the  sum  of  existence  in  one  thought. 
As  we  reach  forth  to  grasp   it,  the  revelation  of  God  is 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  321 

seen  to  have  been  imfolded  ia  its  parts  in  Creation ;  and 
the  parts  are  seen  to  have  been  brought  together  again 
by  the  Incarnation."  ^ 

This  general  view  of  the  nature  of  eternal  life 
may  be  further  tested  by  reference  to  those  dis- 
courses in  chapters  v.  and  vi.  of  the  Gospel,  to  which 
for  another  purpose  we  have  already  referred  (pp.  156- 
164).  If  the  interpretation  of  these  discourses  which 
we  adopted  be  correct,  we  may  find  in  them  a  strong 
confirmation  of  the  mystical  conception  of  eternal 
life.  The  moral  blindness,  pride,  and  obduracy  of 
the  Jews  arc  depicted  as  the  reason  why  they  will 
not  come  to  Christ  that  they  may  have  life  (v.  37-40). 
Had  they  possessed  a  humble  and  teachable  spirit, 
had  they  penetrated  to  the  real  truth  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  lived  the  life  of  obedience  and  fellowship 
with  God  which  corresponds  to  that  truth,  they 
would  have  had  eternal  life. 

Still  more  explicitly  in  the  discourse  on  the  bread 
of  life  does  Jesus  represent  eternal  life  as  dependent 
upon  spiritual  fellowship  with  himself.  He  is  him- 
self the  bread  that  possesses  and  gives  life.  This 
bread  must  be  eaten;  that  is,  his  own  person,  his 
very  spirit  and  life,  must  be  appropriated  in  order 
that  eternal  life  may  be  secured.  "  He  that  eateth 
my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life; 
and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.  He  that 
eateth  me,  he  also  shall  live  because  of  me " 
(vi.  54,  57).     There  is  a  passage  in  the  First  Epistle 

1   The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  pp.  217,  218. 
21 


322  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

which,  though  not  very  plain  in  its  grammatical 
form,  is  clear  in  its  bearing  upon  the  nature  of 
eternal  life:  "And  we  know  that  the  Son  of  God 
is  come,  and  hath  given  us  an  understanding,  that 
we  know  (im  yivcoa/co/xev)  him  that  is  true  [God],  and 
we  are  in  him  that  is  true,  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ. 
This  one  [God]  is  the  true  God,  and  eternal  life  " 
(I.  V.  20).  The  essential  thought  of  the  passage  is 
that  Christ  has  disclosed  God  to  men  in  his  real 
character  so  that  they  may  truly  know  him,  and  they 
do  thus  know  him  by  being  in  him  as  they  are  in 
Christ.  Union  with  Christ  involves  union  with 
God,  and  this  true  God  to  whom  we  are  united 
through  Christ  becomes  eternal  life  to  us.  In  the 
knowledge  and  fellowship  of  God  we  realize  the  true 
life.  This  "  knowledge  rests  on  fellowship  and  issues 
in  fellowship  "  (Westcott). 

Our  inquiries  have  thus  far  led  us  to  a  generic 
conception  of  "eternal  life  "  in  John's  writings.  It 
remains,  however,  to  examine  more  particularly  the 
force  of  the  phrase  so  far  as  it  is  dependent  upon  the 
word  "eternal"  (atwwo?).  The  phrase  "eternal  life  " 
occurs  seventeen  times  in  the  Gospel  and  six  times 
in  the  First  Epistle.  In  none  of  these  cases  does 
there  appear  to  be  any  distinctive  emphasis  upon 
the  word  eternal,  and  in  but  few  instances  is  the 
phrase  so  used  as  to  throw  any  light  upon  the  force 
of  that  word.  There  are  five  passages,  however, 
which  should  be  noticed  in  this  connection.  In  two 
places  eternal  life  is  contrasted  with   perishing  or 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  32o 

destruction  (cnrcoXeia) :  "  God  so  loved  the  world, 
that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  on  him  should  not  perish  (fir}  aTroXrjrat),  but 
have  eternal  life  "  (iii.  16) ;  "  And  I  give  unto  them 
eternal  life;  and  they  shall  never  perish"  (ov  fxr} 
diroXcovTai),  etc.  (x.  28).  The  idea  contained  in  the 
word  perish  is  probably  that  of  an  ethical  destruc- 
tion, the  loss  of  man's  true  destiny  as  a  child  of 
God;  the  opposite  of  this  idea,  "eternal  life,"  would 
not,  in  that  case,  emphasize  primarily  the  continu- 
ance of  existence,  but  the  attainment  of  the  true 
goal  of  man's  being  in  fellowship  with  God.  It  lies, 
no  doubt,  in  the  very  idea  of  this  life  that  it  is  im- 
perishable or  endless,  but  the  stress  of  thought  does 
not  lie  upon  its  perpetuity,  but  upon  its  nature  or 
content.  The  same  will  be  found  to  be  the  case 
where  eternal  life  is  contrasted  with  death:  "He 
that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  him  that  sent 
me,  hath  eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment, 
but  hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life  "  (v.  24).  It 
is  quite  certain  that  the  death  here  spoken  of  is  the 
moral  death  of  sin,  the  state  from  which  it  is  the 
mission  of  the  Son  to  raise  men  (cf.  verse  21),  Here, 
too,  the  spiritual  life  which  is  bestowed  is  eternal, 
not  primarily  in  the  sense  of  being  endless,  but  in 
the  sense  of  being  akin  to  God,  as  the  closing  words 
of  the  passage  intimate :  "  He  that  heareth,  etc.,  hath 
passed  out  of  the  death  [e/c  tov  Oavdrovj  the  death 
which  is  really  such]  into  the  life  "  [et?  Tr)v  ^(otji/,  the 
life  which  is  truly  lifej. 


324  THE  JOHANNINP:  THEOLOGY 

In  two  other  passages  the  certainty  of  resurrection 
is  affirmed  in  close  connection  with  the  promise  of 
eternal  life:  "This  is  the  will  of  my  Father,  that 
every  one  that  beholdeth  the  Son,  and  believeth  on 
him,  should  have  eternal  life;  and  I  will  raise  him 
up  at  the  last  day"  (vi.  40);  "He  that  eateth  my 
flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life;  and  I 
will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day  "  (vi.  54).  In  these 
passages,  however,  the  assurance  of  resurrection 
does  not  appear  to  stand  in  special  connection  with 
the  word  eternal,  but  with  the  whole  idea  which  is 
covered  by  the  phrase  "eternal  life,"  which  is  de- 
clared to  be  spiritual  fellowship  with  Christ.  It  is 
apparent  from  the  associations  of  the  word  eternal 
in  the  phrase  "eternal  life"  that  it  is  a  qualitative 
rather  than  a  quantitative  term;  it  emphasizes  the 
source  and  nature  of  the  life  which  it  describes, 
rather  than  its  continuance.  We  cannot  trace  the 
genesis  or  development  of  John's  idea  of  the  life  that 
is  eternal,  but  it  seems  as  if  he  had  derived  the  con- 
tent of  the  word  eternal  from  associating  it  with  God 
as  the  source  and  type  of  true  life:  "For  as  the 
Father  hath  life  in  himself,  even  so  gave  he  to  the 
Son  also  to  have  life  in  himself"  (v.  26);  therefore, 
"  as  the  Father  raiseth  the  dead  and  quickeneth  them, 
even  so  the  Son  also  quickeneth  whom  he  will " 
(verse  21).  It  is  a  reasonable  conjecture  that  John's 
conception  of  eternal  life  stands  closely  connected 
with  his  idea  of  the  nature  of  God.  That  idea  is 
qualitative  or  ethical.     The  apostle  seems  to  carry 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  325 

every  truth  of  religion  up  beyond  all  associations  of 
time  and  space,  and  to  ground  it  in  the  very  essence 
of  God.  Now,  since  it  is  not  the  perpetuity  of  God's 
existence,  but  his  moral  perfection,  which  chiefly 
constitutes  his  glory,  it  would  follow  that  the  dignity 
of  the  life  which  springs  from  uni  n  with  him  is 
found,  not  primarily  in  its  continuance,  but  in  its 
Godlike  quality. 

I  may,  in  passing,  indicate  the  way  in  which  the 
Johannine  teaching  concerning  eternal  life  may  be 
made  to  bear  upon  the  doctrine  of  "conditional 
immortality."  If  death  or  destruction,  with  which 
eternal  life  is  set  in  contrast,  be  understood,  not 
merely  or  chiefly  in  the  ethical  sense,  but  also  in  the 
sense  of  cessation  of  existence,  and  if  the  emphasis 
in  the  phrase  "  eternal  life  "  be  laid  upon  the  idea 
of  continuance,  it  would  follow  that  eternal  life  in 
Christ  involves  immortality  for  those  only  who 
believe  on  him.  This  life,  we  are  told,  is  in  his 
Son  (1.  V.  11),  and  in  iii.  15  the  correct  text  most 
naturally  yields  the  translation  found  in  the  Revised 
Version  :  "that  whosoever  believeth  may  in  him  have 
eternal  life  "  (so  Meyer,  Weiss,  Westcott,  and  Plum- 
mer).  Eternal  life  in  Christ  will  therefore  mean 
immortality  through  union  with  Christ  if  the  terms 
are  taken  in  what  I  have  called  a  quantitative, 
rather  than  a  qualitative  sense,  —  that  is,  as  refer- 
ring to  perpetuity,  as  contrasted  with  cessation  of 
being.  It  does  not  seem  to  me,  however,  that  this 
application  of  the  passages  in  question  is  naturally 


32G  THE   JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

suggested  by  their  language  or  context,  or  by  the 
apostle's  methods  of  religious  thought.  Life  seems 
to  denote,  I'or  his  mind,  fulness  and  richness  of  being, 
the  realization  of  man's  true  destiny  through  union 
with  God  and  likeness  to  Christ.  Such  a  life  is,  of 
course,  by  its  very  nature,  imperishable.  Death  can 
claim  no  dominion  over  it :  "  If  a  man  keep  my  word, 
he  shall  never  taste  of  death "  (viii.  52) ;  that  is, 
he  shall  pass  through  physical  death  unharmed ; 
"though  he  die,  yet  shall  he  live"  (xi.  25;  cf.  vi. 
50,  51,  58).  This  last  group  of  passages,  which 
assert  continuance  of  life  for  the  believer,  may  seem 
to  justify  the  inference  that  for  unbelievers  there  is 
no  continuance  of  being.  There  is,  however,  no 
indication  that  the  apostle  himself  associated  this 
inference  with  his  doctrine  of  life,  and  the  actual 
statements  which  he  makes  or  reports  seem  to  show 
that  for  his  mind  the  perpetuity  of  the  true  life  is 
incidental  to  its  nature.  The  direct  contrast  to 
eternal  life,  therefore,  would  not  be  extinction,  but 
depravation,  loss,  moral  destruction. 

But  if  persistence  of  being  is  not  the  primary  idea 
which  John  associates  with  life  considered  as  eter- 
nal, how  shall  we  define  the  notion  which  that  word 
adds  to  the  noun  which  it  qualifies  ?  I  think  no 
better  answer  can  be  given  than  that  of  Bishop 
Westcott:  Eternal  life  "is  not  an  endless  duration 
of  being  in  time,  but  being  of  which  time  is  not  a 
measure.  We  have  indeed  no  powers  to  grasp  the 
idea   except   through   forms    and    images   of  sense. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   ETERNAL   LIFE  327 

These  must  be  used ;  but  we  must  not  transfer  them 
as  realities  to  another  order. "  ^  Reuss  sums  up  the 
meaning  of  "  eternal  life  "  in  three  ideas :  (1)  "  the 
idea  of  a  real  existence,  an  existence  such  as  is 
proper  to  God  and  to  the  Word ;  an  imperishable 
existence,  —  that  is  to  say,  not  subject  to  the  vi- 
cissitudes and  imperfections  of  the  finite  world ;  " 
(2)  "the  idea  of  power,  an  operation,  a  communica- 
tion, since  this  life  no  longer  remains,  so  to  speak, 
latent  or  passive  in  God  and  in  the  Word,  but  through 
them  reaches  the  believer;"  and  (3)  the  idea  "of 
satisfaction  and  happiness,  .  .  .  direct  results  of 
union  with  Christ.  "^ 

1  Epistles  of  St.  John,  p.  215. 

2  Hist.  Christ.  Theol,  ii.  496  (orig.  ii.  553,  554). 


CHAPTER   XIV 

THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY 

Literature.  — Weiss:  Johann.  Lehrb.,  Die  Eschatologie,  pp. 
179-191,  and  Bibl.  Theol,  The  Last  Day,  ii.  416-421  (orig.  607  - 
671) ;  ^^'ENDT  :  Teacliing  of  Jesus,  Coming  again  to  the  disci- 
ples according  to  the  Johannine  discourses,  ii.  294-303  (orig. 
565-573);  Reuss:  Hist.  Christ.  Theol.,  Of  Judgment,  ii.  446- 
454  (orig.  ii.  498-508)  ;  Beyschlag  :  Neutest.  Theol,  Das  Welt- 
gericht.  Die  Auferstehung  und  das  ewige  Leben,  i.  287-293, 
and  Die  letzten  Dinge,  ii.  464-466  ;  Frommann  :  Johann.  Lehrb., 
Das  Gericht,  u.  s.  w.,  pp.  660-701  ;  Baur  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Die 
Eschatologie,  u.  s.  w.,  pp.  404-407;  Neander  :  Planting  and 
Training,  Resurrection  and  Judgment,  etc.,  ii.  48-53  ;  Messner  : 
Lehre  der  Apostel,  Die  VoUendung,  pp.  357-360. 

Those  themes  of  religious  thought  which  are 
commonly  comprehended  under  the  term  "escha- 
tology  "  are  less  prominent  in  John  than  in  most  of 
the  New  Testament  writers.  This  fact  is  naturally 
explained  by  his  tendency  to  contemplate  religion 
as  a  present  possession  and  experience.  We  have 
seen  a  conspicuous  illustration  of  this  tendency  in 
our  study  of  his  doctrine  of  eternal  life.  A  mystical 
theology  like  John's  dwells  with  special  fondness 
upon  such  truths  as  union  with  Christ  and  spiritual 
fellowship  with  God,  —  truths  which  are  independent 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  329 

of  time,  and  which  tend  to  make  the  mind  which 
is  absorbed  in  them  relatively  indifferent  to  future 
events  and.  changes,  in  the  judgment  of  some 
scholars  we  find  almost  no  eschatology  at  all,  in  the 
ordinary  sense,  in  John's  writings.  Reuss  is  one  of 
these.  He  says:  "The  current  eschatological  ideas 
of  primitive  Christianity  are  not  found  in  the  Gospel 
of  John,  or,  at  the  most,  if  they  are  adverted  to  in 
some  popular  forms  of  expression,  they  are  so  iso- 
lated that  they  in  no  way  affect  the  system  as  a 
whole.  ...  Of  all  the  facts  of  eschatology,  the 
only  one  of  which  passing  mention  is  made,  is  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead."  ^ 

These  statements  we  shall  have  occasion  to  test  in 
the  course  of  our  inquiries.  We  will,  however,  fore- 
warn the  reader  that  we  shall  often  find  in  John  a 
close  association  of  mystical  ideas,  such  as  that  of 
a  spiritual  coming  of  Christ  and  that  of  a  spiritual 
resurrection,  with  those  of  current  eschatology,  such 
as  the  idea  of  a  visible  second  advent  and  that  of 
a  resurrection  from  the  dead.  This  apparent  com- 
mingling of  two  sets  of  notions  will  often  make  it 
difficult,  and,  perhaps,  sometimes  impossible,  to 
draw  a  clear  line  of  division  between  the  literal  and 
the  spiritual.  There  are  three  themes  in  connection 
with  which  the  eschatology  of  John  can  best  be 
studied.  They  are :  (1)  the  second  advent,  (2)  the 
resurrection,  and  (3)  the  judgment. 

The    terra  advent  or   coming  {irapova-la),  which    is 

1  HisL  Christ.  TheoL,  ii.  498,  499  (orig.  ii.  556,  558). 


330  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

SO  frequently  used  by  Paul  to  denote  the  personal 
return  of  Christ  to  raise  the  dead  and  judge  the 
world,  is  used  but  once  in  our  sources:  "And  now, 
my  little  children,  abide  in  him;  that,  if  he  shall 
be  manifested,  we  may  have  boldness,  and  not  be 
ashamed  before  him  at  his  coming  "  (eV  tt}  irapovaia 
avTov,  I.  ii.  28).  Reuss  admits  that  this  passage 
expresses  the  expectation  of  the  second  coming,  but 
regards  it  as  an  illustration  of  the  imperfectly 
developed  mysticism  of  the  First  Epistle,  which 
finds  its  completion  only  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  The 
Epistle,  he  maintains,  differs  widely  in  this  respect 
from  the  Gospel,  "and  makes  use  of  many  theses 
borrowed  from  ordinary  eschatology. "  ^ 

An  obvious  general  allusion  to  the  approaching 
end  of  the  age  is  found  in  the  words,  "  It  is  the  last 
hour  "  (I.  ii.  18).  The  bearing  of  I.  iii.  2,  3  is  not 
quite  certain.  The  statement  in  the  first  part  of 
verse  2,  "It  is  not  yet  made  manifest  {oviroi  i^av- 
epcod}))  what  we  shall  be,"  may  be  regarded  as  favor- 
ing the  translation  of  the  last  part  which  is  found 
in  the  margin  of  the  Revised  Version:  "We  know 
that,  if  it  [that  is,  what  we  shall  be]  shall  be  mani- 
fested (eav  ^avepwOrj),  we  shall  be  like  him,"  etc. 
On  this  construction  of  verse  2  the  "hope"  which 
is  spoken  of  in  verse  3,  as  set  on  God  or  Christ, 
would  refer  directly  to  the  expectation  of  being  like 
God  or  Christ.  If,  however,  the  subject  of  "shall 
be  manifested  "  (^avepcod^)  is  supposed  to  be  Christ 

2  Hist.  Christ.  Theol,  ii.  503  (orig.  ii.  561). 


THE  JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  331 

(so  both  our  English  versions),  then  the  "hope"  of 
verse  3  would  refer,  at  least  indirectly,  to  the 
anticipation  of  his  advent.  It  is  impossible  to 
decide  confidently  between  these  two  possible  ren- 
derings, but  I  think  the  balance  of  probability  favors 
the  rendering  found  in  our  English  versions.  But 
whatever  view  be  taken  of  this  doubtful  passage,  it 
will  be  seen  from  the  other  two  just  quoted  that  the 
idea  of  a  literal  second  coming  of  Christ  is  not 
absent  from  John's  Catholic  Epistle. 

The  passages  of  principal  interest  and  difficulty, 
however,  which  bear  upon  our  topic,  are  found  in 
chapters  xiv.  and  xvi.  of  the  Gospel.  I  shall 
examine  these  passages,  and  try  to  ascertain  their 
natural  meaning  by  a  study  of  the  language  and 
context.  The  effort  will  be  to  interpret  what  our 
author  has  written ;  the  task  of  determining  by 
conjecture  the  precise  words  and  meaning  of  Jesus 
himself,  in  the  utterance,  sixty  years  or  more  before 
they  were  written  down,  of  those  discourses  which 
John  had  reported,  I  shall  not  attempt. 

The  first  passage  which  we  have  to  consider  is 
xiv.  3:  "And  if  I  go  and  prepare  a  place  for  you,  I 
come  again  (ttoXiv  ep'^^o/xat),  and  will  receive  you 
unto  myself;  that  where  I  am,  there  ye  may  be 
also.'*  There  are  four  interpretations  of  the  words 
"  I  come  again "  which  deserve  notice :  (1)  Some 
refer  them  to  the  coming  of  Christ  to  the  believer 
at  death,  by  which  he  is  taken  to  the  Saviour's 
heavenly   abode    (so    Tholuck,    Lange,     Reuss,    H. 


332  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

Holtzmann).  (2)  Many  apply  the  words  to  a  spirit- 
ual coming  of  Christ  to  his  disciples,  either  spe- 
cifically, through  the  descent  of  the  Paraclete  (so 
Neander,  Liicke,  Godet),  or  —  in  accordance  with  a 
tendency  to  identify  Christ  and  the  Spirit  —  gener- 
ally, to  Christ's  own  spiritual  presence  with  his 
disciples  (so  Wendt  and  Beyschlag).  (3)  Several 
interpreters  suppose  that  the  words  "  I  come  again  " 
are  to  he  taken  in  a  pregnant  or  manifold  sense. 
This  view  is  thus  defined  by  Alford :  "  This  epxo/xai 
is  begun  in  his  resurrection  (verse  18),  carried  on 
(verse  23)  in  the  spiritual  life  (xvi.  22  sq.)^  further 
advanced  when  each  is  fetched  away  by  death  to  be 
with  him  (Phil.  i.  23),  fulli/  comjjlefed  at  his  coming 
in  glory. "  The  interpretation  of  Westcott  is  simi- 
lar: "Though  the  words  refer  to  the  last  'coming  '  of 
Christ,  the  promise  must  not  be  limited  to  that  one 
'coming  '  which  is  the  consummation  of  all  'comings. ' 
Nor  again  must  it  be  confined  to  the  'coming '  to  the 
Church  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  or  to  the  'coming' 
to  the  individual  either  at  conversion  or  at  death, 
though  these  'comings'  are  included  in  the  thought. 
Christ  is,  in  fact,  from  the  moment  of  his  resurrec- 
tion, ever  coming  to  the  world,  and  to  the  Church, 
and  to  men  as  the  risen  Lord"  (cf.  i.  9).^  This  view 
is  shared  by  Stier,  Lange,  Reynolds,  and  Plummer. 
(4)  The  language  is  regarded  as  referring  to  Christ's 
second  coming.  This  is  the  view  of  Hofmann, 
Ewald,   Meyer,   Luthardt,   and  Weiss. 

^  Commentaries,  in  loco. 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  333 

To  review  all  these  opinions  in  detail  and  give  the 
points  which  may  be  urged  for  and  against  each  of 
them,  would  unduly  extend  the  limits  of  this  chap- 
ter. The  language  of  the  verse  and  the  context 
most  strongly  favor,  in  my  judgment,  the  last 
opinion  cited.  Christ's  coming  again  seems  to  be 
set  over  against  his  going  away  to  heaven  and  pre- 
paring a  place  for  the  disciples.  To  receive  them 
unto  himself  seems  most  naturally  to  mean  to  take 
them  to  this  heavenly  abode ;  and  to  these  local  con- 
ceptions the  idea  of  his  personal  coming  best  corre- 
sponds. Nor  is  there  any  strong  presumption 
against  this  application  of  the  words,  in  view  of  the 
references  to  the  "  last  day  "  (vi.  39,  40 ;  xi.  24)  and 
to  the  advent  (xxi.  22;  I.  ii.  28).  The  strongest 
objection  to  this  view  is  derived  from  the  apparently 
different  meaning  of  the  "  comings  "  of  Christ  which 
are  spoken  of  in  the  following  verses  (xiv.  18,  23,  28) 
of  the  same  discourse.  These  verses  may  well  make 
us  hesitate  to  decide  by  what  sort  of  a  "  coming  " 
Jesus  may  originally  have  spoken  of  receiving  his 
disciples  unto  himself,  but  they  do  not  avail  to  cast 
doubt  upon  the  meaning  of  the  words  of  xiv.  3,  as 
they  stand.  If  they  are  not  referred  to  the  parousia, 
they  should  probably  be  understood  as  a  figurative 
method  of  describing  the  blissful  death  of  believers. 

We  must  now  examine  the  later  verses  of  the 
chapter,  which  speak  of  a  "  coming  "  of  Christ.  In 
verse  18  we  read:  "I  will  not  leave  you  desolate 
[orphans]  :  I  come  to  you. "    What  "  coming  "  is  this? 


334  THE  JOHANNTNE  THEOLOGY 

The  connection  seems  to  me  to  make   it  practically 
certain  that  this   coming  refers  to  the   gift   of   the 
Spirit.     In   the    preceding   verse     (17)    the    abiding 
presence  of  the  Spirit  is  promised,  and  in  the  follow- 
ing  (19)   Jesus  says :  "  Yet  a  little  while,  and   the 
world   beholdeth   me   no  more ;  but   ye  behold   me : 
because  I  live  ye  shall  live  also."     The  world  has 
only  physical  sight,  and  when  I  am  no  longer  pre- 
sent in  bodily  form,  the  world  has  no  more  knowl- 
edge of  me ;  but  ye,  through  the  Spirit's  illumination 
and  teaching,  continue,   in  a  spiritual  sense,  to  see 
me.     Our  communion  is  a  fellowship  of  life.     I  shall 
still  exist  for  you,  my  disciples;  I  shall  still  come 
to  you  and  abide  with  you  through  the  presence  and 
power  of  the  Spirit.     The  great  majority  of  recent 
interpreters   agree  in   referring  this  passage  to  the 
coming   of   Christ  in  the  Spirit.  ^     Others  have   re- 
ferred  the  words  to   Christ's  appearances  after  his 
resurrection;^   others   to    the    parousia;^   and    still 
others  have  given  to  the  words  a  double  sense  and 
applied  them  both  to  his  corporeal  and  to  his  spiritual 
return.*      Westcott   gives   the   words   a   continuous 
sense:  ''''  I  come,  ever  and  at  all  times  I  am  coming." 
The  application  of  the  words  to  the  Spirit  is,  how- 
ever,  confirmed  by  the  subsequent  verses. 

In  xiv.  23  Jesus  seems  clearly  to  speak  of  a  spirit- 

^  So  Liicke,  Meyer,  Godet,  Reynolds,  Plummer,  Dwight. 

2  So  Ewald  and  Weiss. 

3  So  Hofmann  and  Luthardt. 

^  So  DeWette,  Ebrard,  Lange,  H.  Holtzmaun. 


THE  JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  335 

ual  "  coming "  of  both  the  Father  and  himself  to 
those  who  love  him:  "If  a  man  love  me  he  will  keep 
my  word:  and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will 
come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him ;  "  and 
what  he  afterwards  says  in  xiv.  28  can  hardly  be 
meant  in  a  sense  specifically  different:  "Ye  heard 
how  I  said  to  you,  I  go  away  and  I  come  again  to 
you. "  Since  his  departure  from  earth  and  the  send- 
ing of  the  Spirit  are  counterparts  (xvi.  7),  it  would 
follow  that  his  "coming  "  to  them  after  his  departure 
would  be  most  naturally  understood  to  refer  to  his 
coming  in  the  gift  of  the  Paraclete. 

In  chapter  xvi.  Jesus  speaks  of  his  disciples  and 
himself  as  seeing  each  other  after  his  departure  :  "  A 
little  while,  and  ye  behold  me  no  more;  and  again 
a  little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me  "  (verse  16).  "  Ye 
therefore  now  have  sorrow :  but  I  will  sec  you  again, 
and  your  heart  shall  rejoice,  and  your  joy  no  one 
taketh  away  from  you  "  (verse  22).  The  interpreta- 
tion which  is  adopted  for  xiv.  18  will  have  consider- 
able influence  in  the  effort  to  determine  the  meaning 
of  these  passages.  Some,  however,  who  do  not  refer 
xiv.  18  directly  or  solely  to  Christ's  appearances 
after  his  resurrection,  understand  the  seeing,  which 
is  here  spoken  of,  as  occurring  in  connection  with 
those  appearances.^  While,  as  we  intimated,  the 
spiritual  sense  of  xiv.  18  would  probably  be  found  to 
be  supported  by  a  majority  of  modern  commentators, 
the  same  cannot  be  said  of  xvi.  16,  22.  These 
^  So  Lange  and  Ebrard. 


336  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

verses  have  been  more  commonly  referred  to  the 
reunion  of  Christ  with  his  disciples  after  his  resur- 
rection.^ Some  have  applied  them  to  the  parousia,^ 
and  still  others  have  understood  them  to  relate  to 
a  process  or  series  of  "comings,"^  in  accordance 
with  the  "  perspective  view "  of  such  prophecies. 
The  choice  seems  clearly  to  lie  between  the  refer- 
ence to  the  appearances  after  the  resurrection  and 
that  to  the  spiritual  vision  of  Christ.  The  whole 
context,  especially  verses  23,  25,  and  26,  seems  to 
me  to  speak  strongly  for  the  latter  view.  Spiritual 
fellowship  in  the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit  ("  that 
day,"  verses  23,  26),  a  completer  apprehension  and 
appropriation  of  himself,  is  the  theme  of  the  dis- 
course. Jesus  assures  the  disciples  that,  though  he 
will  soon  withdraw  his  bodily  presence  from  them, 
he  will,  through  the  Spirit,  even  more  fully  disclose 
himself  to  them,  so  that  he  and  they  shall  spiritually 
see  and  speak  to  one  another.  This  interpretation 
will  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Liicke,  Meyer,  Reuss, 
Godet,  and  D  wight. 

One  further  passage  remains  to  be  considered. 
After  Jesus  had  given  to  Peter  the  charge,  "Feed 
my  sheep  "  (xxi.  17),  he  speaks  to  him  of  the  martyr- 
dom which  awaits  him  in  his  old  age,  and  then  adds, 
"Follow  me  "  (verse  19).  Peter  thereupon  sees  the 
beloved  disciple  John  following,  and  at  once  inquires 

^  So  Luther,  Hengsteiiberg,  Ewald,  Weiss. 
2  So  Augustine,  Hofmaiui,  Lechler. 
^  So  Alford  and  Westcott. 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  337 

in  regard  to  his  fate.  To  tliis  Jesus  replies:  "If  I 
will  that  he  tarry  (/jLevetv)  till  I  come  (eW  epxofiat), 
what  is  that  to  thee  ?  Follow  thou  me  "  (verse  22). 
This  saying,  adds  the  narrator,  gave  rise  to  the 
report  that  John  was  not  to  die,  —  that  is,  that  he 
should  survive  till  Jesus  came.  Interpreters  have 
found  it  no  easy  task  to  determine  what  "  coming " 
is  here  alluded  to.  Some  have  thought  of  Christ's 
coming  to  John  "  in  a  gentle  and  natural  death. "  ^ 
It  is  held  that  this  idea  alone  forms  a  natural  anti- 
thesis to  the  martyrdom  which  Peter  is  to  experi- 
ence; but  this  view  involves  the  implication  that 
Jesus  comes  at  death  only  to  those  who  die  naturally 
or  without  violence.  This  contrast  would  represent 
him  as  coming  to  John  in  death,  but  not  to  Peter. 
Others  think  the  reference  to  be,  primarily,  to  the 
coming  of  Christ  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  though 
some  of  these  writers  regard  this  catastrophe  as  the 
beginning  of  a  series  of  "  comings  "  which  are  implied 
in  the  expression.  ^  This  theory  aims  to  escape  the 
difficulty  that  Jesus  could  have  intimated  the  possi- 
bility of  John's  surviving  his  second  advent,  —  a 
thing  which  was,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  impossible. 
Since  all  the  disciples,  however,  thought  of  the 
parousia  as  near,  they  would  naturally  interpret  the 
words  of  Jesus  as  alluding  to  it.  This  reference  of 
the   words,    however,   seems   far-fetched,   and   since 

^  So  Ewald,  Olshausen,  Lange. 

2  So,  with  some  variations,  Luthardt,  Godet,  Alford,  and 
Westcott. 

22 


338  THE   JOHANNINE    THEOLOGY 

John  outlived  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  many 
years,  not  much  is  gained  by  this  view  in  the  way 
of  harmonizing  the  possibility  suggested  with  the 
actual  fact. 

It  seems,  on  the  whole,  preferable  to  refer  the 
words  "till  1  come"  to  the  parousia,^  and  carefully 
to  observe  the  hypothetical  form  in  which  they 
are  set.  Peter  is  to  suffer  a  violent  death  before 
the  parousia;  he  is  actuated,  perhaps  by  sympathy 
(Weiss,  Godet,  Plummer),  or  possibly  by  curiosity 
(Bengel,  De  Wette),  or  by  jealousy  (Liicke,  Meyer),  to 
ask  the  fate  of  John.  Jesus  replies  to  Peter  that  he 
need  not  concern  himself  about  that;  if  it  be  his 
will  that  John  should  live  till  his  coming,  that  can 
make  no  difference  with  his  own  divinely  appointed 
course.  This  hypothetical  statement  easily  became 
transformed  into  a  categorical  assertion,  —  though 
without  warrant ;  for  Jesus  did  not  say :  He  shall 
live  till  I  come,  but  only :  If  I  will  that  he  do  so, 
that  does  not  concern  thee.^ 

It  will  be  seen  that,  according  to  the   interpreta- 

1  So  Liicke,  De  Wette,  Meyer,  Weiss,  H.  Holtzmann. 

2  Dr.  A.  P.  Peabody,  in  his  essay  on  the  Fourth  Gospel,  re- 
ferred to  in  the  Preface,  presents  the  view  that  the  words /o//o!<; 
and  come  in  the  conversation  really  related  only  to  remarks 
concerning  local  movements,  which  the  disciples  partially  over- 
heard, and  "  not  unnaturally  connected  with  the  profoundly 
solemn  subjects  on  which  he  had,  no  doubt,  been  talking  with 
them  as  with  Peter,  and  they  imagined  that  by  '  staying  till 
I  come  back  '  he  meant  '  living  till  my  second  coming. '  "  See 
p.  Ill  of  the  volume  of  essa3^s  entitled,  llie  Fourth  Gospel. 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCIIATOLOGY  339 

tions  which  I  have  preferred,  there  are  but  four  pas- 
sages in  our  sources  which  can  be  pointed  to  as 
referring  directly  to  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord. 
We  have  also  to  remember  that  many  scholars  dis- 
pute this  reference  in  the  case  of  three  out  of  these 
four  passages.  In  the  order  of  the  certainty  with 
which  they  refer  to  the  parousia,  I  should  arrange 
them  as  follows:  I.  ii.  28;  xiv.  3;  I.  ii.  18;  xxi.  22. 
Cautious  as  one's  conclusions  must  be  in  dealing 
with  passages  of  such  peculiar  difficulty  as  these  and 
others  kindred  to  them,  two  or  three  results  seem 
clear:  (1)  The  Johannine  writings,  as  well  as  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  and  the  Epistles,  express  the  ex- 
pectation of  the  near  parousia  of  the  Lord.  (2)  The 
expression  /  come,  lam  coming,  is  not  always  used 
in  the  same  sense.  Jesus  is  represented  as  predict- 
ing "comings"  which  cannot  be  identified  with  the 
parousia.  (3)  We  are  thus  led  to  observe  a  fact  of 
capital  importance  for  the  study  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment doctrine  of  the  parousia  in  general.  If  Jesus 
actually  spoke  of  various  "comings,"  some  of  which 
were  spiritual  revelations  or  crises,  may  it  not  be 
that  he  really  referred  to  some  such  manifestations 
of  himself  in  his  kingdom,  where  he  is  represented 
in  the  Synoptists  as  predicting  his  coming  (appar- 
ently conceived  of  by  the  writers  as  personal  and 
visible)  in  connection  with  such  events  as  the  mis- 
sion of  the  twelve  (Matt.  x.  23;  cf.  xxi  v.  13,  14), 
and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (Matt.  xxiv.  29  sq. 
Mark  xiii.  26;  Luke  xxi.  27),  and  that,  too,  during 


840  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

the  lifetime  of  persons  then  living-  (Matt.  xvi.  27, 
28;  xxvi.  64;  Mark  ix.  1;  xiii.  30;  Luke  ix.  27; 
xxi.  32)? 

In  close  connection  with  the  allusions  to  the 
parousia,  and  as  showing  the  association  of  the 
resurrection  and  the  judgment  with  it,  stand  certain 
references  to  the  "last  day."  In  the  discourse  on 
the  bread  of  life,  the  statement  is  four  times  re- 
peated that  Christ  will  "raise  up  at  the  last  day" 
those  who  have  been  renewed  through  faith  in  him 
and  fellowship  with  his  life  (vi.  39,  40,  44,  54).  In 
xi.  24  Martha  speaks  of  the  resurrection  of  her 
brother  "  at  the  last  day. "  This  "  day  "  is,  there- 
fore, the  day  of  resurrection;  that  it  is  also  the  day 
of  judgment  is  evident  from  xii.  48:  "The  word 
which  I  spake,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last 
day;"  and  I.  iv.  17:  "Herein  is  love  made  per- 
fect with  us,  that  we  may  have  boldness  in  the  day 
of  judgment."  Although  the  language  in  John  is 
less  explicit  than  in  the  Synoptists  and  in  Paul 
respecting  the  relations  of  the  parousia,  resur- 
rection, and  judgment,  there  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  that  they  are  conceived  of  as  occurring  in 
close  connection,  in  the  order  named,  at  the  nearly 
approaching  end  of  the  present  age. 

We  turn  next  to  John's  teaching  concerning  the 
resurrection.  The  passages  which  we  have  just 
noticed  (vi.  39,  40,  44,  54)  in  connection  with  the 
expression  "the  last  day,"  clearly  assert  a  future 
resurrection  of  the  believer  from  the  state  of  death. 


THE  JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  341 

though  they  do  not  define  the  nature  of  it.  Reuss 
regards  the  words  "  I  will  raise  him  up  "  as  only  a 
popular  form  of  saying  that  "  to  the  believer  there  is 
no  death"  (xi.  25). ^  But  while  there  is  a  certain 
kinship  between  these  two  ideas,  the  former  is  too 
definitely  expressed  to  permit  of  identification  with 
the  latter.  A  passage  of  much  interest  and  impor- 
tance for  our  present  theme  is  v.  19-29.  The  idea 
of  resurrection  is  here  three  times  presented,  in 
versos  21,  25,  and  29,  and  is  again  indirectly  referred 
to  in  verse  24.  Verse  21  reads :  "  For  as  the  Father 
raiseth  the  dead  and  quickeneth  them,  even  so  the 
Son  also  quickeneth  whom  he  will."  These  words 
were  spoken  just  after  the  healing  of  the  impotent 
man  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda.  The  Son,  we  are  told, 
has  wrought  this  miracle  on  the  Father's  authority 
and  in  accord  with  the  Father's  own  beneficent 
activity  (verse  19),  but  the  Son  will  do  even  greater 
works  than  such  miracles  are  (verse  20),  for  he  will 
raise  the  dead  and  quicken  them  (verse  21).  What 
sort  of  a  resurrection  is  here  meant  ?  Before  at- 
tempting to  decide,  let  us  follow  the  discourse  a  few 
steps  farther.  Jesus  explains  that  judgment,  as 
well  as  resurrection,  belongs  to  the  Son,  who  is  en- 
titled to  equal  honor  with  the  Father  (verses  22,  23) 
and  continues:  "Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  He 
that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  him  that  sent 
me,  hath  eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment, 
but  hath   passed   out   of   death   into   life.     Verily, 

1  Hist.  Christ.  TheoL,  ii.  500  (orig.  ii.  558). 


342  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

verily,  I  say  unto  you,  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is, 
when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God ;  and  they  that  hear  shall  live  "  (verses  24,  25). 
Then  he  speaks  of  the  Father  as  the  absolute  source 
of  life,  and  the  Son  as  the  mediate  source  of  life, 
and  the  bearer  of  judgment,  and  continues :  "  Marvel 
not  at  this:  for  the  hour  cometh  in  which  all  that 
are  in  the  tombs  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall 
come  forth;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the 
resurrection  of  life;  and  they  that  have  done  ill, 
unto  the  resurrection  of  judgment "  (verses  28,  29). 

Shall  we  regard  this  whole  passage  as  literal 
throughout,  or  as  figurative  throughout,  or  as  partly 
literal  and  partly  figurative  ?  It  has  been  inter- 
preted in  all  three  ways ;  I  unhesitatingly  follow  the 
great  majority  of  modern  interpreters  in  deciding 
for  the  third  view.  In  that  case  we  may  either 
regard  verse  21  as  introducing  the  conception  of 
spiritual  resurrection,  which  is  found  also  in  verses 
24  and  25, ^  or  we  may  suppose  that  Jesus'  life- 
giving  work  in  both  its  spiritual  and  its  physical 
aspects  is  presented,  and  that  verses  24,  25,  and 
verses  28,  29,  respectively,  set  forth  these  two  sides 
of  his  salvation.'-^  This  is  a  minor  point  of  differ- 
ence, and  the  language  of  verses  21-23  is  not  deci- 
sive. But  since  this  language  is  very  general  and  is 
intended  to  describe  the  "greater  works  "  (verse  20) 
than  miracles  of  healing  which  the  Son  shall  do,  it 

'   So  Lucke,  De  Wette,  Olshausen,  Meyer,  Plummer. 
2  So  Tholuck,  Godet,  Weiss,  Westcott. 


THE  JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  o43 

seems  to  me  most  natural  to  take  verses  21-23  as  a 
comprehensive  description  of  Christ's  life-bringing 
and  judicial  mission,  which  is  described  in  the 
verses  that  follow  both  on  its  ethical  or  spiritual 
(verses  24-27)  and  on  its  physical  side  (verses  28, 
29).  In  any  case,  the  language  of  verses  24,  25  can- 
not, without  violence,  be  made  to  refer  to  anything 
but  a  spiritual  resurrection,  and  just  as  little  can 
that  of  verses  28,  29  refer  to  anything  but  a  physical 
resurrection.  In  the  former  passage  Jesus  is  speak- 
ing of  the  believer  as  already  possessing  eternal  life, 
and  declares  that  the  hour  when  the  dead  shall  hear 
the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God  is  already  present.  A 
spiritual  quickening  from  moral  death  which  is 
already  taking  place  must  be  meant.  But  in  verses 
28  and  29,  the  dead  who  are  "  in  the  tombs  "  are 
spoken  of,  and  they  are  described  as  coming  forth 
to  a  resurrection,  either  of  life  or  of  judgment,  ac- 
cording as  they  have  done  good  or  ill.  Here  only 
physical  resurrection  can  be  meant. 

What  we  see,  then,  in  this  passage  is  not,  as 
Reuss  says,  a  comparison  between  the  spiritual 
resurrection  and  the  physical,  with  a  declaration 
of  the  superior  importance  of  the  former  {cf.  fiei^ova 
epya,  verse  20),^  but  a  juxtaposition  of  the  two  ideas 
which,  taken  together,  illustrate  the  greatness  and 
completeness  of  the  Saviour's  life-giving  mission. 
We  must  now  look  more  closely  at  verses  28  and  29, 
and  place  alongside  of  them  the  few  other  passages 

1  Hist.  Christ.  Theol,  ii.  499  (orig.  ii.  558). 


344  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

which  illustrate  the  idea  of  physical  resurrection  in 
John.  In  verse  29  it  is  said  that  they  that  have  done 
good  shall  come  forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  life 
(€69  avdaraaiv  ^co?}?),  and  they  that  have  done  ill  unto 
the  resurrection  of  judgment  (et?  avdaracnv  Kptaeco'i). 
The  genitives  "  of  life  "  and  "  of  judgment  "  may  be 
understood  as  conveying  the  idea  of  belonging  to,  and 
so  may  designate,  respectively,  a  resurrection  which 
results  in  life  in  the  Messiah's  heavenly  kingdom, 
and  a  resurrection  which  issues  in  a  condemnatory 
judgment.^  These  words  are  also  taken  as  defining 
and  limiting  the  terms  on  which  they  depend,  so  that 
the  sense  would  be:  a  resurrection  which  results 
from  the  possession  of  life,  and  a  resurrection  which 
results  from  the  judgment  which  is  already  outstand- 
ing against  those  who  have  rejected  Christ  (iii.  18). ^ 
I  can  see  no  reason  why  both  ideas  may  not  be  in- 
volved. Those  who  possess  the  true  life  enter  upon 
its  completion  at  the  resurrection;  those  who,  by 
reason  of  sin  and  unbelief  are  already  judged,  find 
that  sentence  confirmed  and  ratified  in  the  final 
assize.  When  it  is  said  that  unbelievers  arc  judged 
already,  that  believers  do  not  come  into  judgment, 
and  that  those  who  have  done  ill  come  forth  to  a 
resurrection  of  judgment,  the  word  "  judgment  "  is 
used  in  the  sense  of  an  unfavorable  or  condemnatory 
judgment,  so  that  the  idea  of  a  judgment  for  the 
righteous  in  the  sense  of  a  favorable  sentence  pro- 

^  So  Lucke,  Meyer,  Godet. 

2  So  Luthardt,  Weiss,  H.  Holtzmann. 


THE  JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  345 

noimcing  their  acquittal  and  acceptance  is  not 
excluded.  It  will  be  seen  that  our  passage  —  in 
contrast  to  Paul  —  explicitly  asserts  the  resurrection 
of  all  men;  but  there  is  no  hint  of  a  separation  in 
time  between  the  resurrection  of  life  and  the  resur- 
rection of  judgment  (as  Meyer  holds).  Only  the 
former  resurrection,  however,  carries  with  it  the 
idea  of  the  fulness  of  life  and  blessedness  which 
characterizes  John's  conception  of  salvation. 

We  find  nothing  further  in  John  bearing  directly 
upon  the  resurrection,  except  the  references  to  it  in 
connection  with  the  death  and  raising  of  Lazarus. 
When  Jesus  said  to  Martha :  "  Thy  brother  shall  rise 
again  "  (xi.  23),  she  replied :  "  I  know  that  he  shall 
rise  again  in  the  resurrection  at  the  last  day  "  (verse 
24) ;  to  which  Jesus  answered :  "  I  am  the  resurrec- 
tion and  the  life :  he  that  believeth  on  me,  though 
he  die,  yet  shall  be  live :  and  whosoever  liveth  and 
believeth  on  me  shall  never  die  "  (verses  25,  26).  It 
is  evident  that  Martha  is  here  represented  as  cher- 
ishing a  belief  in  a  resurrection  at  the  end  of  time. 
Reuss  says  that,  in  his  reply  to  her,  Jesus  does  not 
exactly  negative  this  idea,  but  "deprived  it  of  all 
theological  value,  in  comparison  with  that  other 
belief,  that  life  and  resurrection  begin  even  now, 
triumphing  over  death  in  him  who  receives  both 
directly  from  the  Saviour.  "^  But  the  contrast 
between  the  thought  of  Jesus  and  that  of  Martha  is 
not  the  contrast  between  spiritual  and  physical  resur- 

1  Hist.  Christ.  TheoL,  ii.  500  (oiig.  ii.  558). 


346  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

rection,  but  that  between  a  far-off  resurrection  day 
and  the  present  power  of  resurrection  which  i^esides 
in  himself:  "I  mn  the  resurrection  and  the  life" 
(xi.  25).  Jesus  would  call  her  thoughts  away  from 
the  "  last  day  "  to  himself,  as  the  One  who  has  abol- 
ished death  for  those  who  believe  in  him,  and  has 
brought  in  eternal  life.  Resurrection  is  included 
in  the  larger  thought  of  life,  which  does  not,  indeed, 
exclude  physical  dissolution,  but  which  deprives  it  of 
all  power  over  the  believer.  Probably  the  saying,  "  I 
am  the  resurrection,"  etc.,  was  also  intended  to  point 
forward  to  the  raising  of  Lazarus  which  followed. 
In  any  case,  Jesus  wishes  to  direct  Martha's  thoughts 
to  himself,  as  a  present  life-giving  power,  and  to  indi- 
cate the  wide  scope  of  that  life  which  he  brings  to  men, 
according  to  which  it  includes,  rather  than  abrogates, 
the  idea  of  physical  resurrection.  It  need  only  be 
added  that  the  raising  of  Lazarus  (xii.  1,  9,  17)  and 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  himself  (xx.  1  sq.),  which 
John  narrates  in  detail,  are  quite  inconsistent  with 
the  views  that  the  idea  of  corporeal  resurrection  is 
only  present  by  suggestion  in  John.  Moreover,  all 
the  references  to  the  subject  are  in  the  Gospel. 
There  is  not  one  in  the  Epistle,  where,  according  to 
Reuss's  theory  of  the  imperfect  mysticism  and  cruder 
eschatology  of  the  Epistle,  as  compared  with  the 
Gospel,  they  should  be  found. 

We  turn  to  the  doctrine  of  the  judgment.  Just  as 
the  life-giving  work  of  the  Son  is  presented  chiefly  in 
its  present  aspect,  so  John  emphasizes  the  process  of 


THE  JOHANNINE  ESCHATOLOGY  347 

judgment  which  is  continually  taking  place  more  than 
he  does  the  final  judgment  at  the  end  of  the  present 
world-period.  And  as  the  future  resurrection  seems 
to  be  viewed  as  an  element,  and,  in  some  sense,  as 
the  consummation  of  the  Son's  bestowment  of  life 
upon  mankind,  so  the  future  judgment  appears  to  be 
regarded  as  the  culmination  of  a  process  of  judgment 
which  is  inseparably  connected  with  the  presence 
and  effect  of  divine  light  and  truth  in  the  world. 

There  are  several  distinctions  which  need  to  be 
carefully  kept  in  mind  in  seeking  to  construct  from 
the  scattered  notices  in  John  a  doctrine  of  the  judg- 
ment. They  are  such  as  these :  (1)  the  distinction 
between  judgment  when  it  stands  in  contrast  to  sal- 
vation, and  judgment  in  the  sense  of  the  moral  test- 
ing of  men  according  to  their  acceptance  or  rejection 
of  the  truth;  (2)  the  distinction  between  judgment 
in  the  neutral  and  in  the  condemnatory  sense;  (3) 
the  contrast  between  present  and  future  judgment, 
and  the  relation  of  Christ  to  each. 

I  have  already  (pp.  63,  64)  pointed  out  the  solution 
of  the  apparent  contradiction  between  certain  pas- 
sages which  deny  that  Christ  judges  men  and  certain 
others  which  represent  him,  not  only  as  actually 
judging  them,  but  as  coming  into  the  world  for  that 
purpose,  I  will  briefly  call  attention  to  them  again. 
The  principal  passages  are :  "  I  judge  no  man " 
(viii.  15);  "And  if  any  man  hear  my  sayings  and 
keep  them  not,  I  judge  him  not:  for  I  came  not  to 
judge  the  world,  but  to  save  the  world  "  (xii.  47) ; 


348  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

"For  God  sent  not  the  Son  into  the  world  to  judge 
the  world ;  but  that  the  world  should  be  saved 
through  him  "  (iii.  17).  Yet  Jesus  says  in  immediate 
connection  with  the  first  of  these  passages  :  "  Yea  and 
if  I  judge,  my  judgment  is  true  "  (viii.  16) ;  and  else- 
where :  "  As  I  hear,  I  judge :  and  my  judgment  is 
righteous"  (v.  30),  and  again:  "I  have  many  things 
to  speak  and  to  judge  concerning  you  "  (viii.  26) ; 
and  even:  "For  judgment  came  I  into  this  world" 
(ix,  39).  The  doctrine  which  results  from  these 
apparently  inconsistent  statements  is,  that  the  direct 
and  primary  purpose  of  Jesus'  mission  was  to  save 
and  not  to  condemn  the  world,  but  that  his  revelation 
of  the  truth  to  men  inevitably  tests  them  and  sepa- 
rates them  according  to  their  acceptance  or  rejec- 
tion of  it.  This  principle  is  stated  in  the  passage : 
"  This  is  the  judgment,  that  the  light  is  come  into 
the  world,  and  men  loved  the  darkness  rather  than 
the  light;  for  their  works  were  evil  "  (iii.  19).  Light 
cannot  but  test  those  to  whom  it  comes ;  truth  judges 
by  its  very  nature,  and  its  discriminations  are  abso- 
lutely "true"  and  "righteous"  (viii.  16;  v.  30).  In 
this  sense  (not  in  the  sense  of  condemnation)  Jesus 
says :  "  For  judgment  came  I  into  this  world  "  (ix. 
39),  that  is,  for  the  purpose  of  testing  men  and  deter- 
mining what  attitude  they  would  take  toward  divine 
truth,  as  he  immediately  proceeds  to  say  :  "  That  they 
which  see  not  [that  is,  those  who  are  conscious  of 
their  need  of  light  and  guidance ;  cf.  verse  41]  may 
see ;  and  that  they  which  see  [that  is,  those  who,  in 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  349 

their   spiritual  pride,  say   'we  see,'  verse  41]  may 
become  blind. " 

Closely  akin  to  these  passages  are  others  which 
more  directly  describe  a  present  process  of  judgment. 
That  process  is  the  moral  testing  which  is  inseparably 
connected  with  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ,  and 
in  so  far  as  the  work  of  Christ  secures  the  salvation 
of  the  world,  this  judgment  involves  the  condemna- 
tion and  dethronement  of  the  powers  of  evil:  "Now 
is  the  judgment  of  this  world :  now  shall  the  prince 
of  this  world  be  cast  out  "  (xii.  31).  The  Son  con- 
ducts this  judgment:  "For  neither  doth  the  Father 
judge  any  man,  but  he  hath  given  all  judgment  unto 
the  Son ;  that  all  may  honor  the  Son  even  as  they 
honor  the  Father  "  (v.  22,  23) ;  "  and  he  (the  Father) 
gave  him  (the  Son)  authority  to  execute  judgment, 
because  he  is  the  Son  of  man  "  (v.  27).  But  even 
here  the  saying  of  Jesus  that  he  judges  no  man,  if 
properly  understood,  is  applicable.  He  does  not 
personally  judge  men ;  his  personal  attitude  toward 
mankind  is  solely  that  of  Saviour.  It  is  rather  his 
work,  his  word,  his  truth,  which  is  represented  as 
judging  men  in  the  sense  of  pronouncing  condemna- 
tion against  them  both  here  and  hereafter.  The 
judgment  is  that  light  is  come;  men's  attitude 
toward  the  light  involves  their  judgment;  the  light 
judges  them,  or  —  if  the  statement  will  not  be  mis- 
understood —  they  judge  themselves.  "  He  that 
believeth  is  not  judged;"  his  attitude  toward  the 
truth  carries  in  its  very  nature  his  acquittal;  he  that 


350  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

believeth  not  hath  been  judged  already,  because  he 
hath  not  believed  on  the  name  of  the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God  "  (iii.  18,  19) ;  his  judgment  is  involved 
in  his  attitude  toward  the  truth  which  Jesus  embodies 
and  reveals.  The  Saviour  does  not  come  to  judge  him, 
but  to  save  him,  but  by  his  rejection  of  salvation  he 
turns  the  saving  message  itself  into  a  judgment. 

This  distinction  must,  I  think,  be  the  key  to  the 
understanding  of  a  passage  where  Jesus  disclaims 
even  the  exercise  of  condemnatory  judgment  in  the 
last  day  upon  those  w4io  reject  him  and  receive  not 
his  sayings :  "  If  any  man  hear  my  sayings  and  keep 
them  not,  I  judge  him  not:  for  I  came  not  to  judge 
the  world,  but  to  save  the  world.  He  that  rcjecteth 
me,  and  receiveth  not  my  sayings,  hath  one  that 
judgeth  him :  the  word  that  I  spake,  the  same  shall 
judge  him  in  the  last  day  "  (xii.  47,  48).  Only  the 
two-fold  distinction  (1)  between  judgment  as  moral 
testing  and  as  condemnation,  and  (2)  between  Christ's 
direct  personal  work  (salvation)  and  the  judicial 
effect  of  his  truth  (if  rejected),  can  enable  us  to 
adjust  this  passage  to  those  which  describe  Christ  as 
judging.  He  is  7iot  the  judge  in  the  sense  that  his 
personal  desire  nnd  the  wdiole  direct  aim  of  his 
mission  contemplate  salvation;  yet  he  is  the  judge 
in  so  far  as  his  truth  necessarily  tests  and  separates 
men,  and  pronounces  condemnation  against  those 
who  reject  it.  His  "  word  "  shall  judge  men  at  the 
last  day,  as  it  is  constantly  judging  those  to  whom  it 
comes. 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  351 

Having  seen  in  what  sense  Christ  is  both  the  pres- 
ent and  future  judge  of  men,  we  naturally  ask, 
What  is  the  import  of  the  saying  that  the  Father 
judges  no  man,  but  hath  committed  all  judgment  to 
the  Son,  and  especially  of  the  further  statement  that 
the  Father  has  given  the  Son  "authority  to  execute 
judgment  because  he  is  the  Son  [or  a  son]  of  man  " 
(v.  22,  27)  ?  On  this  passage  Beyschlag  has  this 
suggestive  comment :  "  The  eternal  love  condemns 
no  one  because  he  is  a  sinner ;  as  such  it  does  not  at 
all  condemn ;  it  leaves  it  to  men  to  judge  themselves, 
through  rejection  of  the  Saviour  who  is  presented  to 
them.  '  The  Son  of  man  '  is  the  judge  of  the  world 
just  because  he  presents  the  eternal  life,  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  to  all,  and  urges  all  to  the  eternal 
decision,  and  thus  urges  those  who  continue  unbeliev- 
ing to  a  continuing  self-judgment. "  ^  Much  here  turns 
upon  the  saying  that  Jesus  executes  judgment 
"because  he  is  Son  of  man."  Many  have  supposed 
this  to  mean  that  he  does  this  as  Messiah,  since 
judgment  is  apart  of  Messiah's  work;  but  in  New 
Testament  usage  both  terms  have  the  article  where 
the  phrase  "the  Son  of  man"  refers  to  Jesus  as  Mes- 
siah. It  is  noticeable  that  here  the  title  is  fto?  av6p6i- 
TTov.  Meyer  supposes  the  title  to  point  specifically  to 
the  incarnation.  As  incarnate  Son  he  is  judge, 
because  in  the  economy  of  redemption  he  was 
appointed  to  do  his  work  through  becoming  man. 
This  view  seems  to  ground  his  judicial  function  too 
much  in  an  "economy  "  or  decree,  and   too  little  in 

1  Neutest.  Theol.,  i.  290. 


352  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

his  nature  as  Son  of  man.  Beysclilag  thinks  that 
judgment  is  here  attributed  to  the  Son  because  he  is 
the  ideal  man,  the  true  standard  of  humanity.  To 
me  that  view  seems  preferable  which  finds  a  thought 
here  akin  to  that  of  Heb.  ii.  17,  18  and  iv.  15,  which 
speak  of  the  necessity  that  Christ  should  share  man's 
nature  and  enter  into  his  life  and  experience  in 
order  to  fulfil  his  work.  Weiss  expresses  this  idea 
by  saying  that  Christ  judges  "so  far  as  he  is  a  Son 
of  man,  and  can  in  human  form  bring  near  to  men 
the  life-giving  revelation  of  God.  "^  Westcott  inter- 
prets thus :  "  The  prerogative  of  judgment  is  con- 
nected with  the  true  humanity  of  Christ  {Son  of 
man),  and  not  with  the  fact  that  he  is  the  represen- 
tative of  humanity  (the  Son  of  man).  The  Judge, 
even  as  the  Advocate  (Heb.  ii.  18)  must  share  the 
nature  of  those  who  are  brought  before  him.  The 
omission  of  the  article  concentrates  attention  upon 
the  nature  and  not  upon  the  personality  of  Christ. "  ^ 
The  passage  in  which  it  is  said  that  the  Paraclete, 
"when  he  is  come,  will  convict  the  world  ...  of 
judgment,  because  the  prince  of  this  world  hath  been 
judged"  (xvi.  8,  11)  has  already  been  considered  in 
its  general  import  (pp.  210  sg. ).  So  far  as  it  bears 
u])on  our  present  inquiry  it  is  closely  akin  to  xii.  31 : 
"  Now  is  the  judgment  of  this  world :  now  shall  the 
prince   of  this    world   be   cast   out."     These  words 

*  Johann.  Lelirh.,  p.  224. 

2  Commenlary,  in  loco.  This  general  view  of  the  passage  — 
with  variations  —  is  illustrated  in  the  expositions  of  Augustine, 
Luther,  Baur,  Holtzniann,  Pluniiner,  and  many  others. 


THE   JOHANNINE   ESCHATOLOGY  353 

express  the  sense  of  Christ's  triumph  in  his  redemp- 
tive work,  the  certainty  of  the  overthrow  —  seen  as 
already  accomplished  —  of  Satan's  kingdom.  They 
resemble  the  saying  of  Jesus  upon  hearing  the  report 
of  the  successful  work  of  the  seventy  disciples :  "  I 
beheld  Satan  falling  as  lightning  from  heaven " 
(Luke  X.  18). 

The  passages  which  we  have  thus  far  examined 
illustrate,  almost  exclusively,  the  idea  of  a  process 
of  judgment  going  on  continuously  in  this  world, 
and  constituting  the  reverse  side  of  the  work  of 
redemption.  Several  of  the  terms,  however,  which 
are  used  in  connection  with  the  teaching  respecting 
the  resurrection,  such  as  "  resurrection  of  judgment  " 
and  resurrection  "at  the  last  day,"  prepare  us  to 
find  that  judgment  is  also  represented  as  a  future 
event.  Accordingly,  we  read  not  only  of  resurrec 
tion  but  of  judgment  "in  the  last  day"  (xii.  48). 
Thus  the  two  events  are  coupled  together.  In  like 
manner,  the  parousia  is  associated  with  these  events 
where  the  apostle  exhorts  his  readers  to  abide  in 
Christ,  "that,  if  he  shall  be  manifested,  we  may 
have  boldness,  and  not  be  ashamed  before  him  at  his 
coming"  (I.  ii.  28).  That  the  prospect  of  judgment 
is  here  associated  with  Christ's  coming  is  evident 
from  the  language  of  the  passage,  and  is  confirmed 
by  the  kindred  expression,  "that  we  may  have 
boldness  in  the  day  of   judgment"  (I.   iv.   17). 

It   will   thus   be   seen  that   there  are  only  a  few 
passages  in  John  which  directly  speak  of  the  future 

23 


354  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

judgment.  There  are  as  many  more,  however,  which 
clearly  imply  the  idea  of  such  a  judgment.  While, 
therefore,  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  by  legitimate 
exegesis  that  the  common  esehatological  conception 
of  the  judgment  is  not  present  in  John,  it  is  equally 
certain  that  the  emphasis  of  the  apostle's  thought 
rested  rather  upon  that  of  a  continuous  process  of 
judgment  coincident  with  the  work  of  salvation. 
The  final  judgment  appears  to  be  regarded  as  the 
climax  of  the  moral  process  of  testing  which  goes  on 
through  the  operation  of  the  truth  upon  the  minds  of 
men.  The  idea  of  the  judgment  which  the  apostle 
presents  suggests  the  saying  of  Schiller :  "  The  his- 
tory of  the  world  is  the  judgment  of  the  world. "  ^ 
The  conceptions  of  a  present  and  of  a  future  judg- 
ment are  not  inconsistent.  The  latter  presupposes 
the  former,  and  ratifies  and  completes  it.  It  is 
quite  natural  that  John,  according  to  his  mystical 
method  of  thought,  should  lay  chief  emphasis  upon 
the  moral  process,  since  for  him  the  whole  work  of 
redemption,  both  in  its  direct  and  remote  effect,  is 
viewed  from  the  stand-point  of  inward  experience  and 
moral  development.  He  sees  the  future  as  already 
implicit  in  the  present;  eternal  life  as  already  begun 
here ;  the  physical  resurrection  as  a  part  of  the  Son's 
complete  bestowment  of  life,  which  has  already  taken 
place  for  the  believer,  and  the  future  judgment  as  but 
the  crisis  of  a  process  which  is  going  forward  con- 
stantly in  the  life  of  every  man. 

1  "  Die  AVeltgeschichte  ist  das  Weltgei'icht.  " —  Resignation. 


CHAPTER   XV 

THE   THEOLOGY   OF   PAUL   AND    OF   JOHN    COMPARED 

Literature. — Reuss  :  Hist.  Christ.  Tlieol.,  Paul  and  John, 
ii.  513-530  (orig.  ii.  572-000);  Lechler:  Apostolic  and  Post- 
Apostolic  Times,  John  and  Paul,  ii.  250-259  (orig.  pp.  516-524)  ; 
Lange  :  Das  apostolische  Zeitalter,  Das  Stadium  und  der  Typus 
der  Lehre  des  Johannes,  ii.  603-613  ;  Frommann  :  Der  Johann. 
Lehrb.,  Verlialtniss  der  johanneischeu  Christologie  zu  der  ander- 
weitigen  nevitestamentlichen  Lehre,  pp.  480-5-17 ;  Messner  : 
Lehre  d.  Apostel,  Vergleichung  der  apostolischen  Lehrbegriffe, 
pp.  381-421 ;  Van  Oosterzee  :  Bibl.  Theol.  of  the  New  Test., 
The  Harmony  of  the  Apostles  with  each  other,  pp.  253-260  : 
Baur  :  Neutest.  Theol.,  Verhaltniss  zum  Paulinismus,  pp.  393- 
395;  ScHAFF  :  Apostolic  Christianity  (vol.  i.  of  his  History  of  the 
Christian  Church'),  The  Theology  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  pp. 
510-504;  Murphy:  The  Scientific  Bases  of  Faith,  Paul  and 
John  on  the  Person  of  Christ,  pp.  391-418. 

Paul  and  John,  represent  the  two  most  distinctive 
types  of  apostolic  doctrine.  Their  marked  differ- 
ences in  personality  and  in  methods  of  thought  make 
a  comparison  of  the  types  which  they  represent  at 
once  a  difficult  and  a  fascinating  task.  Paul  is  the 
representative  Christian  schoolman  of  his  time ;  he 
is  practised  in  analysis  and  argument.  John  illus- 
trates rather  the  meditative  and  intuitive  order  of 
mind.     Paul    is    always    seeking   to    argue    out   the 


356  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

truth,  and  to  prove  it  from  the  Old  Testament  and 
from  experience.  John  simply  sees  the  truth  and 
declares  it,  as  if  confident  that  those  who  have  an 
eye  for  it  will  also  see  and  accept  it.  Paul's  method 
is  more  inductive;  John's  more  deductive.  The 
former  is  illustrated  in  the  piling  up  of  proofs  of 
the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  in  Romans. 
The  undeniable  corruption  of  the  heathen  world,  the 
equal  depravity  of  the  Jews,  and  the  multiform  tes- 
timony of  the  Old  Testament,  are  proofs  which  com- 
bine to  show  that  salvation  can  only  be  by  grace, 
never  by  merit.  For  John,  however,  the  work  of 
salvation  seems  to  flow  naturally  from  the  very 
nature  of  God  as  love.  Paul  is  more  analytic,  John 
more  synthetic.  Although  Paul's  religious  concep- 
tions are  capable  of  combination  and  simplification, 
the  apostle  has  kept  them  to  a  great  extent  apart, 
and  has  dealt  with  them  separately.  His  doctrines 
of  faith,  of  works,  of  sin,  and  of  the  law,  are  suffi- 
cient illustrations.  All  John's  religious  ideas  are, 
on  the  contrary,  comprehended  in  a  few  elementary 
principles,  which  are  never  lost  sight  of.  The  whole 
life  of  Christ  flows  out  from  his  nature  as  the  eter- 
nal Light  of  the  world.  The  whole  gospel,  with  all 
its  various  duties  and  obligations,  is  grounded  in 
the  nature  of  God  as  light  and  love.  Sin  is  simply 
darkness,  or  the  absence  and  opposite  of  love.  Sal- 
vation is  not  conceived  of  as  a  process  by  which, 
upon  certain  terms,  acquittal  from  a  sentence  of 
condemnation  is  secured    (as  with    Paul),   but   as  a 


PAUL   AND  JOHN   COMPARED  357 

welcoming  of  the  light,  and  walking  in  it, —  in  short, 
as  a  life  of  fellowship  with  God. 

With  these  hints  respecting  certain  generic  differ- 
ences in  the  modes  of  religious  thought  which  the 
two  apostles  illustrate,  let  us  briefly  review  the 
principal  doctrines  which  they  have  in  common,  and 
note  such  points  of  difference  and  of  likeness  as  may 
present  themselves. 

1.  The  Idea  of  God.  —  Both  apostles  hav  an 
intense  sense  (characteristic  of  the  Jewish  mind)  of 
the  direct  efficiency  of  God  in  all  things.  For  both, 
the  will  of  God  is  sovereign,  and  definite  particular 
events  are  regarded  as  necessarily  happening  in 
order  that  specific  Old  Testament  predictions  may 
be  fulfilled.  In  both  writers  we  observe  the  Jewish 
mode  of  thought  respecting  God  and  the  way  in 
which  he  makes  known  his  will  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  accomplishes  his  purposes  of  mercy ;  but  in 
Paul  the  Jewish  type  of  thought  is  much  more  per- 
vading and  determining.  In  him  God  is  conceived 
of  in  a  more  legal  way  than  in  John ;  he  is  a  judge 
on  the  throne  of  the  world.  The  problem  of  religion 
is,  how  man  may  appear  before  him  so  as  to  be 
accepted  and  acquitted.  To  John,  God  appears 
rather  as  the  Being  in  whom  all  perfections  are 
met.  The  problem  of  religion  is,  whether  men  will 
desire  and  strive  to  be  like  him.  For  Paul,  God  is 
certainly  essentially  gracious  as  well  as  essentially 
just,  yet  he  has  nowhere  comprehended  the  ethical 
perfections  of  God  in  a  single  conception  such  as 
John's.— "God  is  light,"  or,  "God  is  love," 


358  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

There  is  unquestionably  a  fundamental  unity  be- 
tween Paul's  and  John's  doctrine  of  God.  In  the 
teaching  of  both  writers,  creation,  revelation,  and 
redemption  are  accordant  with  the  divine  nature  and 
flow  out  from  it,  but  this  conception  is  much  more 
explicitly  presented  in  John  than  in  Paul.  When 
the  separate  elements  of  Paul's  doctrine  are  gathered 
up  and  combined,  it  is  obvious  that  holy  love  would 
best  define  for  him  the  moral  nature  of  God;  but, 
owing  to  his  more  Jewish,  legal  method  of  thought, 
he  has  less  closely  unified  the  divine  attributes  than 
has  John.  Paul  emphasizes  more  the  will  of  God, 
John  more  his  nature.  Paul  thinks  it  enough  to 
ground  events  in  the  choices  or  acts  of  God;  John 
goes  farther  and  grounds  them  in  his  essence.  1 
have  no  question  that  these  standpoints  ultimately 
meet  and  blend.  Paul's  view,  when  carried  back  to 
the  farthest  point  to  which  thought  can  reach,  con- 
ducts us  to  the  conception  of  John.  It  is,  however, 
significant  that  Paul,  with  all  his  argument  and 
reasoning,  only  comes  into  a  distant  view  of  those 
loftiest  heights  of  contemplation  concerning  God, 
where  John  habitually  dwells  as  if  they  were  the 
natural  home  of  his  spirit.  With  keen  and  just 
discrimination,  therefore,  did  the  ancient  Church 
accord  to  John  the  name  theologian,  since  he,  of  all 
early  Christian  teachers,  penetrated  most  profoundly 
into  the  depths  of  the  divine  nature. 

2.  The  Person  of  Christ.  —  Both  writers  empha- 
size the  pre-existence  of  Christ  and  his  exaltation  to 
heavenly  glory ;   both  emphasize  his  relation  to  the 


PAUL   AND  JOHN   COMPARED  359 

universe  at  large  in  the  work  of  revelation  and  re- 
demption; both  ascribe  creation  mediately  to  him. 
For  Paul,  all  fulness  of  divine  life  and  power  dwell 
in  Christ,  and  the  scope  of  his  redeeming  love  is  as 
wide  as  the  universe.  But  while  this  lofty  character 
and  work  are  by  Paul  ascribed  to  Christ,  it  will  be 
noticed  that  he  contemplates  the  Saviour  chiefly  in 
his  historic  manifestation.  He  designates  him  gen- 
erally by  titles  which  refer  to  him  as  a  historic  per- 
son, such  as  "Christ."  It  remains  for  John  to  seek 
out  some  term  which  shall  designate  his  essential, 
eternal  nature.  This  term  is  the  Logos,  by  which 
the  apostle  would  express  the  nature  of  One  who  sus- 
tains an  inner,  changeless  relation  to  God  which 
underlies  the  incarnation  and  saving  work  of  the 
Redeemer.  John  seems  to  advance  beyond  the  idea 
of  a  voluntary  humiliation  of  the  Son  of  God  for 
man's  salvation,  and  to  conceive  of  the  incarnation 
as  a  certain  special  method  of  manifestation  which 
the  Logos  adopted  quite  in  accordance  with  his 
nature.  He  is  the  perpetual  medium  of  revelation; 
the  bringer  of  life  and  light  to  men.  It  is  true  that 
it  is  almost  impossible  to  determine  where  the  line 
runs  in  the  prologue  between  the  acts  of  the  Logos 
before  and  after  the  incarnation.  Probably  the 
apostle  intended  no  such  line  to  be  sharply  drawn ; 
he  conceives  the  revelation  of  the  Logos  in  humanity 
merely  as  a  historic  illustration  of  his  eternal  nature 
and  action.  The  historic  is  set  on  the  background 
of  the  eternal,  and  after  the  description  of  the  his- 


360  THE  JOIIANNINE   THEOLOGY 

toric  manifestation  of  the  Logos  is  clearly  intro- 
duced, the  thought  still  recurs,  now  and  again,  to 
the  universal  truths  which  that  manifestation  illus- 
trates. In  the  opening  verses  (i.  1-4)  the  absolute 
nature  and  action  of  the  Logos  are  described,  ending 
with  the  statement,  "and  the  life  was  the  light  of 
men."  Then  tho  description  enters  the  sphere  of 
history  and  the  shining  of  the  light  of  the  Logos  in 
the  world's  darkness  is  depicted  (verse  5),  and  then 
comes  John's  witness  in  preparation  for  the  coming 
of  the  true  Light  (verses  6,  8).  This  Light  now 
appears,  but  the  description  of  it  uses  the  broadest 
terms.  He  was  coming  into  the  world  and  lighting 
every  man ;  he  was  from  the  beginning  in  the  world 
which  he  had  made  (verses  9-10).  The  Logos  is  for 
John  the  universal  principle  and  agent  of  revela- 
tion; he  has  been  perpetually  operative  in  the  world. 
Li  every  time  he  has  touched  the  lives  of  men,  and 
his  revelation  of  himself  in  the  incarnation  is 
grounded  in  what  he  essentially  is,  and  in  those 
relations  which  he  has  ever  borne  to  the  world  which 
he  has  made  and  in  which  he  has  dwelt.  While, 
therefore,  both  apostles  have  the  same  general  con- 
ception of  the  exaltation  of  Christ's  person,  John 
develops  more  distinctly  than  Paul  the  idea  of  the 
eternal  personal  pre-existence  of  the  Son,  and  of  his 
perpetual  activity  since  the  beginning  of  time  in 
revealing  the  divine  light  to  men,  and  in  blessing 
and  saving  those  who  received  it. 

3.    The  Work  of  Christ.  —  Both  apostles  agree  in 


PAUL   AND  JOHN   COMPARED  361 

ascribing  a  sacrificial  significance  to  the  saving  mis- 
sion of  Christ.  For  Paul  his  death  on  the  cross  is 
the  central  point  of  his  work,  and  for  John  he  is  the 
Lamb  of  God  whose  death  takes  away  the  world's 
sin,  and  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  world. 
But  John  appears  to  conceive  of  the  idea  of  sacrifice 
more  comprehensively  than  Paul.  For  Paul,  Christ's 
death  is  a  ransom-price  by  which  men  are  redeemed. 
Some  kind  of  equivalence  is  assumed  to  exist  be- 
tween the  Saviour's  sufferings  and  the  penalty  due  to 
human  sin.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  in  some  way 
meet  the  ends  of  the  remitted  punishment;  they 
vindicate  God's  holy  displeasure  against  sin  as  fully 
as  the  punishment  of  sin  would  do,  and  thus  they 
stand  in  stead  of  that  punishment,  and  make  it 
morally  possible  for  God  to  withhold  the  penalty  of 
sin  from  all  who  trust  in  the  Redeemer. 

This  Pauline  method  of  thought  respecting  re- 
demption clearly  has  its  roots  in  the  Old  Testament 
and  in  Jewish  thought.  As  in  the  sacrificial  system, 
the  animal  which  is  slain  in  sacrifice  is  regarded  as 
a  victim  which  suffers  vicariously  in  the  place  of 
the  sinful  man,  so  the  Saviour  is  regarded  as  suffer- 
ing in  the  sinner's  stead,  and  as  bearing  in  some 
real  sense  the  penal  consequences  of  the  world's  sin. 
Christ's  death  is  vicarious  in  the  sense  that  his 
sufferings  are  substituted  for  sin's  punishment,  and 
they  serve  the  ends  of  that  punishment  by  vindicat- 
ing the  righteousness  of  God  as  fully  as  the  punish- 
ment of  sin  would  have  done. 


362  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

While  John  is  much  less  explicit  than  Paul  in  his 
references  to  the  method  of  redemption,  he  appears 
to  contemplate  the  Saviour's  sacrificial  work  as  an 
example  of  the  operation  of  a  universal  law.  He 
likens  his  death  to  the  dying  of  the  grain  of  wheat, 
which  must  itself  perish  in  order  that  the  germ 
within  it  may  unfold  and  the  larger  product  appear. 
Men,  too,  are  to  give  their  lives  for  one  another  as 
Christ  gave  his  life  for  them.  Such  expressions  of 
John  seem  to  rest  upon  the  idea  that  the  law  of  self- 
giving,  of  dying  in  order  to  fuller  life,  is  impressed 
upon  the  whole  universe,  and  is,  perhaps,  founded 
in  the  very  nature  of  God.  "  God  so  loved  the  world 
that  he  gave,''^  seems  to  be  the  key-note  of  this 
Johannine  conception  of  sacrifice.  Love  is  essen- 
tially vicarious,  and  the  universe  is  built  on  the 
principle  of  sacrifice.  Lower  forms  of  life  are  per- 
petually giving  themselves  to  sustain  higher  forms ; 
they  die  and  rise  again  in  a  larger  and  richer  life. 
John  seems  to  conceive  of  Christ's  giving  of  his  life 
not  so  much  as  an  act  of  suffering  and  death  as  a 
process  of  self-giving,  and  the  appropriation  of  its 
benefits  is  by  him  described  as  a  partaking  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood,  John's  expressions  upon 
the  subject  are  m3"stical,  and  their  precise  meaning 
difficult  to  grasp  and  define;  but  they  illustrate  a 
mode  of  thought  which  it  is  extremely  interesting  to 
follow  out,  and  one  which  has  fascinated  many  of 
the  profoundest  minds  of  Christendom.  The  few 
hints  which  he  has  given  us  in  his  writings  form  but 


PAUL  AND  JOHN  COMPARED      363 

scanty  material  for  a  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  but 
I  am  persuaded  that  his  idea  of  vicariousness  is 
rooted  in  his  idea  of  God  as  love.  In  love  as  the 
giving,  sympathizing,  burden-bearing  quality  of 
God's  nature  lies  the  starting-point  of  John's 
thought  respecting  the  method  of  redemption.  The 
idea  of  outward  substitution  and  transfer,  which  is 
still  observed  in  Paul,  is  lost  in  John,  because  the 
whole  subject  is  carried  to  a  higher  standpoint  and 
seen  in  a  higher  light.  The  essential  vicariousness 
of  love  is  the  principle  which,  in  John,  carries  the 
notion  of  substitution  up  out  of  the  sphere  of  out- 
ward, legal  relations,  and  places  it  in  the  very  bosom 
of  God.  Satisfaction  does  not  represent  an  act  of 
appeasing  God's  righteousness  ab  extra^  but  a  process 
within  the  divine  perfection  whereby  love  —  which 
is  God's  perfect  moral  nature  —  finds  its  satisfaction 
in  giving  and  suffering  for  others. 

The  standpoints  of  Paul  and  John  are  not  really 
inconsistent.  The  Johannine  idea  of  God,  if  made 
the  premise  of  Paul's  argument,  would  lead  him 
along  the  path  which  conducts  to  John's  conception 
of  salvation.  It  is  Paul's  more  legal  method  of 
thought  concerning  God,  and  his  less  perfectly  unified 
conception  of  the  divine  nature,  which  makes  him 
seem  to  follow  a  different  track  of  thought  from 
John.  But  in  the  last  analysis  the  two  types  of 
doctrine  meet  and  blend.  Paul  teaches  that  in  the 
suffering  and  death  of  Christ  God  exhibited  his 
righteousness  so  that  he  might  be  just  in  justifying 


364  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGy 

the  believer.  But  when  we  inquire,  What  is  God's 
righteousness,  and  how  does  God  exhibit  it  ?  we  can 
find  no  rational  answer  except  that  God's  righteous- 
ness is  the  self-respect  of  perfect  love,  and  that  all 
the  perfections  of  God  are  exhibited  by  their  exer- 
cise. God  satisfies  his  perfections  only  bj  reveal- 
ing them  and  by  realizing  in  the  universe  the  ends 
which  accord  with  them.  If  God  is  love,  the  doctrine 
of  Paul  as  well  as  of  John  carries  us  in  all  reflection 
upon  the  atonement  out  of  the  realm  of  temporal 
substitution  and  satisfaction  into  the  realm  of  those 
truths  which  are  esssential  and  eternal  in  God. 

4.  The  Doctrine  of  Sin.  —  In  the  main  features  of 
this  doctrine  there  is  an  obvious  agreement  between 
Paul  and  John.  Sin  is  for  both  universal  and  guilty. 
Paul  connects  sin  in  its  origin  and  diffusion  with 
the  transgression  of  Adam,  while  John  —  so  far  as 
he  intimates  any  view  of  sin's  origin  —  appears  to 
ascribe  its  introduction  into  the  world  to  Satan. 
Both  ideas  rest  upon  the  narrative  of  the  fall  in 
Genesis,  and  coincide  so  far  as  the  idea  of  the  primal 
source  of  temptation  is  concerned.  The  forms  in 
which  the  two  writers  speak  of  sin  are,  in  some 
cases,  similar;  in  some,  different.  Both  represent 
sin  as  a  bondage  or  slavery,  in  contrast  to  the  true 
freedom  which  is  the  boon  of  the  Christian  man; 
both  depict  it  as  a  state  of  moral  death,  —  the  oppo- 
site of  the  true  life  of  the  soul.  But  Paul's  charac- 
teristic conception  of  sin  is  that  of  a  world-ruling 
power  or  personified  principle  which  makes  men  its 


PAUL  AND  JOHN  COMPARED       365 

captives,  shuts  them  up  in  prison,  and  pronounces 
condemnation  upon  them.  John,  in  accordance 
with  a  peculiar  dualistic  method  of  thought,  is  more 
accustomed  to  speak  of  sin  as  darkness  in  contrast 
to  light,  or  as  hate  as  contrasted  with  love.  The 
true  life  consists  in  walking  in  the  light,  while  the 
sinful  life  consists  in  walking  in  darkness.  Light 
is  for  John  the  symbol  of  goodness  or  God-like- 
ness; darkness  the  synonym  of  evil  or  unlikeness 
to  God. 

The  contrast  between  flesh  and  spirit  which  has  so 
important  a  connection  with  Paul's  doctrine  of  sin 
is  quite  incidentally  presented  in  John,  and  does  not 
carry  the  same  associations  which  it  has  in  Paul. 
In  Paul's  writings  "the  flesh  "  is  the  sphere  of  sin's 
manifestation,  and  thus  comes  to  be  used  in  an  ethical 
sense  and  almost  to  be  identified  with  sin  itself. 
"The  spirit"  in  man  is  what  we  should  call  his 
religious  nature,  in  which  he  is  allied  to  God,  — the 
highest  element  of  his  personality,  which  leads  him 
to  aspire  after  holiness.  Between  the  flesh  and  the 
spirit  there  goes  on  in  the  natural  man  a  constant 
conflict,  with  the  result  that  the  flesh  keeps  its 
supremacy.  It  is  only  when  Christ  is  received  in 
faith  that  the  victory  of  the  spirit  is  achieved. 
John  has  essentially  the  same  doctrine,  but  he  does 
not  develop  it  in  this  form.  "Flesh"  and  "spirit" 
represent  for  him  two  contrasted  orders  of  being, — 
the  sphere  of  the  lower  or  outward  to  which  we  are 
related  by  our  natural  life,  and  the  higher  realm  of 


S66  THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 

reason  and  spirit  with  which  our  begetting  from  God 
sets  us  in  relation. 

5.  The  Method  of  Salvation.  —  In  describing  the 
way  of  salvation  Paul's  great  words  are,  justification, 
and  righteousness;  John's  are,  birth  from  God,  and 
life.  In  no  other  particular  are  the  characteristic 
differences  of  the  two  apostles  so  clearly  illustrated. 
Paul,  in  accordance  with  his  Jewish  training  and  as 
a  result  of  his  controversies  with  Pharisaic  opponents, 
wrought  out  the  doctrine  of  salvation  in  juridical 
forms.  God  is  a  judge  w^hose  sentence  of  condemna- 
tion is  out  against  sinful  ma,n ;  Christ  by  his  death 
provides  for  the  annulling  of  the  sentence.  Faith  is 
the  condition  on  which,  this  effect  could  be  secured; 
that  condition  being  met,  the  claim  is  cancelled  and 
a  decree  of  acquittal  is  issued.  Righteousness  for 
Paul  is  the  status  of  a  man  so  acquitted.  The  pro- 
cess by  which  the  result  is  reached  is  called  justifi- 
cation. Not  that  all  this  is  conceived  of  by  Paul  as 
a  mere  court-process.  It  has  its  ethical  counterpart 
in  the  spiritual  transformation  of  the  justified  man, 
but  the  legal  idea  determines  the  form  of  the  doc- 
trine. With  John  the  case  is  quite  different;  he 
has  relinquished  the  forms  of  Jewish  legalism.  No 
controversy  with  Judaizing  opponents  requires  him 
to  meet  them  upon  the  plane  of  their  own  concep- 
tions. Salvation  is  not  thought  of  as  the  result  of 
a  divine  declaration,  but  as  the  result  of  a  divine 
impartation  of  life.  It  is  not  described  as  a  legal 
status,  but  as  a  condition  or  character. 


PAUL   AND  JOHN   COMPARED  367 

But  even  here,  sharp  as  the  formal  difference  is, 
there  is  an  underlying  unity;  both  apostles  have 
at  the  heart  of  their  teaching  the  same  profound 
mysticism ;  for  both,  the  Christian  life  is  realized  m 
union  with  Christ.  To  be  in  Christ,  to  abide  in 
him,  to  feed  upon  him,  are  terms  which  represent 
equally  the  profoundest  thoughts  of  both  writers. 
Both  coincide  perfectly  in  making  the  divine  grace 
the  source  of  salvation,  and  a  self-renouncing  accept- 
ance of  that  grace  the  condition  of  appropriating  it. 

6.  The  Doctrine  of  Faith.  — In  this  article  the 
apostles  closely  coincide.  For  both,  faith  is  more 
than  mere  belief;  it  involves  personal  relation  and 
fellowship.  With  Paul  it  is  associated  with  such 
ideas  as  are  expressed  in  the  phrases  "in  Christ," 
"dying  with  Christ,"  and  "newness  of  life."  With 
John  it  is  associated  with  "abiding  in  Christ," 
"living  through  Christ,"  and  "eating  the  flesh  and 
drinking  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  man."  In  both, 
therefore,  there  is  a  pronounced  mystical  element. 
Faith  is  life-union  with  Christ.  It  is  no  mere  pos- 
session of  truths  which  lie  dead  and  cold  in  the 
mind;  it  is  a  vital  alliance  with  Christ,  the  hiding 
of  our  life  with  him  in  God.  By  both  apostles 
equally  is  faith  regarded  as  the  very  opposite  of  a 
meritorious  achievement  which  saves  by  its  inher- 
ent excellence;  it  is  the  correlative  of  grace,  and 
therefore  involves  the  explicit  renunciation  of  merit 
before  God,  Faith  has  its  power  and  value,  not  in 
itself  as  an  exercise  of  the  human  powers,  but  in  its 


368  THE   JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

object,  Christ,  to  which  it  links  us.  The  saving 
power  of  faith  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  joins  our  life 
to  Christ.  It  is,  therefore,  not  so  much  an  achieve- 
ment as  an  acceptance. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  faith  is  a  mere 
passive  receptivity.  The  very  nature  of  faith,  as  an 
acceptance  of  a  divine  life,  involves  the  possession  of 
a  new  moral  energy.  Faith  works  by  love.  In 
faith  a  new  life-force  is  received  and  new  powers 
stir  within  the  Christian  man.  It  would  be  equally 
out  of  harmony  with  Paul  and  with  John  to  regard 
faith  as  a  mere  act  standing  at  the  beginning  of  the 
religious  life  but  isolated  from  it.  Faith  penetrates 
the  whole  Christian  life;  it  is  an  active,  energetic 
principle.  If  it  carries  us  out  of  ourselves,  it  does 
so  in  order  that  it  may  bring  us  under  the  power  of 
new  spiritual  forces  which  shall  inspire  and  ennoble 
our  whole  nature,  and  impart  an  unwonted  energy 
to  our  every  faculty. 

7.  The  Doctrine  of  Love.  —  Both  apostles  magnify 
the  idea  of  love  and  give  it  a  central  place  in  their 
conceptions  of  religion.  Although  John  is  often, 
and  properly,  called  the  apostle  of  love,  there  is  no 
passage  in  his  writings  which  lays  greater  stress 
upon  the  duty  of  love  and  upon  its  centrality  in  the 
gospel  than  does  that  sublime  "Psalm  of  Love,"  the 
thirteenth  chapter  of  First  Corinthians.  It  would  be 
an  interesting  and  instructive  study  to  compare  this 
chapter  in  detail  with  the  First  Epistle  of  John, 
where  his  doctrine  of  love  is  most  fully  developed. 


PAUL   AND  JOHN   COMPARED  369 

In  both,  love  is  made  the  sum  of  all  goodness.  For 
Paul,  love  best  summarizes  "  that  which  is  perfect ; " 
it  best  represents  spiritual  maturity  in  contrast  to 
all  such  partial  gifts  and  graces  as  knowledge,  or  the 
power  to  prophesy  or  to  speak  with  tongues.  Love 
is  the  quality  which  gives  unity  and  worth  to  all 
other  virtues;  it  is  the  very  essence  of  goodness 
without  which  all  outward  acts  which  are  commonly 
esteemed  to  be  good  are  really  without  value  in  the 
sight  of  God. 

In  like  manner  in  John  love  is  the  "command- 
ment," at  once  old  and  new,  which  comprehends  all 
specific  duties  and  obligations.  But  John  also  urges 
that  this  principle  is  true  both  in  Christ  and  in 
his  disciples  (I.  ii.  8),  that  is,  it  is  the  law  of  the 
divine  nature  as  well  as  of  the  human, — a  universal 
principle  or  law  of  being.  Hence  he  urges  that  as 
Christ  out  of  love  "laid  down  his  life  for  us,"  so 
"  we  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives  for  the  brethren  " 
(I.  iii.  16).  It  follows  from  this  conception  that 
"every  one  that  loveth  is  begotten  of  God,  and 
knoweth  God  "  (I.  iv.7)  since  "  God  is  love  "  (verse  8). 
In  love  we  enter  into  fellowship  with  God  and  be- 
come like  him,  since  his  moral  nature  is  itself  love. 
"  God  is  love ;  and  he  that  abideth  in  love  abideth  in 
God,  and  God  abideth  in  him "  (I.  iv.  16). 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  John  carries  his  doctrine 
of  love  one  step  further  than  Paul,  and  that  this 
step  is  a  most  important  and  significant  one.  Paul 
applies  the  principle  of  love  to  the  mutual  duties  and 

24 


370  THE  JOHANNINE   THEOLOGY 

relations  of  men,  but  lie  does  not  show,  at  least,  not 
explicitly,  that  the  application  of  this  principle 
among  men  is  gromidecl  in  the  very  nature  of  God. 
This  step  is  taken  by  John;  or  rather,  it  would  be 
more  exact  to  say  that  he  starts  from  this  conception 
of  God's  nature  and  finds  in  it  the  divine  law  which 
ruled  in  the  life  and  work  of  Jesus,  in  which  men 
must  also  find  the  ideal  for  their  own  lives.  In  this 
difference  between  the  two  ways  in  which  the 
apostles  deal  with  the  same  great  principle,  we  find 
a  conspicuous  illustration  of  John's  more  abstract 
and  deductive  method  of  thought,  as  contrasted  with 
Paul's  more  concrete  and  inductive  method.  It  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  the  statements  of  Paul  respect- 
ing love  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  First  Corinthians 
would,  if  carried  out,  inevitably  lead  to  the  great 
conclusion  (which  to  John,  however,  w^as  rather  a 
presupposition)  that  God's  nature  is  essentially  love, 
and  that  love  is  tlio  highest  duty  and  the  most  com- 
prehensive virtue,  because  the  ideal  of  all  goodness 
and  the  law  of  all  duty  must  always  lie  in  the  very 
being  of  God. 

It  appears  to  me,  therefore,  that  the  two  apostles, 
notwithstanding  the  formal  differences  in  the  devel- 
opment and  application  of  their  ideas  of  love,  are 
essentially  one,  and  that  if  we  should  carry  up  the 
law  of  love  which  Paul  so  eloquently  describes  as 
the  sum  of  virtue,  we  could  find  no  other  source  or  seat 
for  it  —  no  other  ground  for  its  authority  and  value 
—  than  that  to  which  John  refers  it  when  he  says: 


PAUL   AND   JOHN   COMPARED  371 

"Let   us    iove   one   another:  for   love    is    of    God" 
(I.  iv.  7). 

From  the  brief  comparative  sketch  which  we  have 
given  of  the  teachings  of  Paul  and  of  John,  it  will 
be  evident  that  the  latter  furnishes  us  to  a  much 
smaller  degree  than  the  former  with  the  elements  of 
a  system  of  thought.  Paul  has  to  a  great  extent  jjut 
together  for  us  the  various  elements  of  his  teaching 
so  as  to  give  them  a  certain  completeness  of  form. 
John  has  given  us  only  single  truths,  a  series  of 
glimpses  into  great  depths  which  he  has  made  no 
effort  to  explore  in  detail.  We  can  hardly  speak  of 
a  Johannine  systein  at  all,  and  we  are  left  to  corre- 
late as  best  we  can  the  disjecta  meinhra  of  doctrine 
which  John  has  left  us  in  his  writings.  The  two 
great  Christian  teachers,  however,  in  many  ways  sup- 
plement each  other,  and  both  illustrate  and  enforce 
with  peculiar  power  the  great  truths  of  God's  love 
and  grace  which  constitute  the  changeless  substance 
of  the  gospel  of  Christ. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY^ 

I.     Treatises  on  the  Johannine  Theology. 

B.   Weiss,   Der  Johanneische  Lehrbegriff  in   seinen  G rundziUjen 

untersucht.     Berlin,  1862. 
K.  Frommann,  Der  Johanneische  Lehrber/riff  in  seine/n  Vcrhaltnisse 

zur  gesammten  hiblisch-christlichen  Lelire.     Leipzig,  1839- 
K.  R.   KdsTLiN,  Der  Leiirhegriff  des  EvangeJiumx  luid  der  Briefe 

Johannes,  u.  s.  ic     Berlin,  1843. 
A.  HiLGi'^NFELD,  Das  Evangelium  und  die  Briefe  Johannes  nach 

ihrem  Lehrbegrijj'e  dargestellt.     Braunschweig,  1849. 
E.  H.  Sears,  The  Fourth  Gospel  the  Heart  of  Christ.     Boston, 

1872. 
J.  J.  Lias,  The  Doctrinal  System  of  St.  John  considered  as  evidence 

for  the  date  of  the  Gospel.     London,  1875. 
O.  HoLTZMANN,  Das  Johunnesevangeliain  untersucht  und  erkldrl. 

Darmstadt,  1887. 
E.  IIaupt,  Der  erste  Brief  des   Johannes,  ein  Beiirag   zur  bib- 

lischen  Theologie.    Colberg,  1870.    English  translation.    Edin- 
burgh, 1879. 

^  New  Te.stament  lutroductious,  Comnieutaries  on  the  writings  of 
John,  and  treatises  on  the  literary  and  historical  que.stions  connected 
with  these  writings  (witli  the  exception  of  two  or  three  such  works 
which  are  largely  Biblico-theological  in  method),  are  omiDted  from  this 
list,  since  they  do  not  strictly  belong  to  the  subject  of  the  Johannine 
Theology.  Amjjle  references  to  these  branches  of  literature  may  be 
found  in  Gloag's  Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writiinjs  (London,  1891), 
in  Schaff's  Histori/  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.  (New  York,  1882), 
and  in  Watkius's  Bampton  Lectures  for  1890  on  Modern  Criticism  con- 
sidered in  its  relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  (London,  1890). 


374  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

W.  W.  Peyton,  The  Memorabilia  of  Jesus,  commonly  called  the 
Gospel  of  St.  John.     London  and  Edinburgh,  1892. 

T.  11.  SciiOLTEN,  Das  Evangelium  nach  Johannes.  Translated 
from  Dutch  into  German.     Berlin,  1867. 

F.  D.  Maukice,  The  Gospel  of  St.  John,  a  Series  of  Discourses; 
also  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  a  Series  of  Lectures  on  Christ- 
ian Ethics.     London  and  New  York,  1893. 

II.  Works  on  more  Comprehensive  Subjects,  which 
INCLUDE  A  Treatment  of  the  Johannine  Theology. 

B.  Weiss,  Lehrbuch  der  biblischen  Theologie  des  Neuen  Testa- 
ments. 5  Aufl.  Berlin,  1888.  Translation  from  tlie  third 
edition.     2  vols.     Edinburgh,  1882-83. 

H.  H,  Wendt,  Der  Inhalt  der  Lehre  Jesu,  Gbttingen,  1890. 
English  translation  under  the  title.  The  Teaching  of  Jesus. 
2  vols.     Edinburgh  and  New  York,  1892. 

E.  Reuss,  Histoire  de  la  Theologie  chretienne  au  Siecle  aposlo- 
lique.  2  vols.  Strasbourg  and  Paris,  1864.  English  trans- 
lation.    2  vols.     London,  1872. 

W.  Bey'SChlag,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie.  2  vols.  Halle, 
1891 ;  also  Die  Chrislologie  des  Neuen  Testaments.  Berlin, 
1866. 

W.  F,  Adeney,  The  Theology  of  the  Neio  Testament.  New 
York,  1894. 

C.  F.  ScHMiD,  Bihlische  Theologie  des  Neuen  Testaments.  5  Aufl. 
1886.  Translation  from  the  fourth  edition.  Edinburgh, 
1877. 

H.  EwALD,  Revelation  ,•  7^-  Nature  and  Method.  Edinburgh, 
1884.  Old  and  New  Testament  Theology.  Edinburgh,  1888. 
These  volumes  are  translations  of  parts  of  the  work,  Die 
Lehre  der  Bibel  von  Gott,  u.  s.  w.     4  vols.     Leipzig,  1871-76. 

F.  C.  Baur,  Vorlesungen  iiber  neutestamentliche  Theologie.  Lei}")- 
zig,  1864. 

H.  Messner,  Die  Lehre  der  Apostel.     Leipzig,  1856. 
J.  P.  Thompson,  The   Theology  of  Christ  from  his  own   Words- 
New  York,  ]  870. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  375 

J.  J.  Van  Oosterzee,  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament. 
Translated  from  the  Dutch  by  M.  J.  Evans.  London,  1870; 
also  by  G.  E.  Day.     New  Haven,  1871. 

A.  Immer,  Theologie  des  Neuen  Testaments.     Bern,  1877. 

A.  Neander,  History  of  the  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christ- 
ian Church,  etc.  English  translation.  2  vols.  London 
(Bolni  ed.).  Revised  translation  by  E.  G.  Robinson.  New 
York,  18G9. 

J.  P.  Lange,  Das  apostolische  Zeilalter,  Braunschweig,  1853-54. 

G.  V.  Lechler,  Das  apostolische  and  das  nachapostolische  Zeitalter. 
3  Aufl.  Leipzig,  1885.  English  translation.  2  vols.  Edin- 
burgh, 1886. 

C.  VVkizsacker,  Das  apostolische  Zeitalter  der  christlichen  Kirche. 
2  Aufl,  Freiburg,  i.  B.,  1890.  Englisli  translation.  2  vols. 
New  York,  1801. 

O.  Pfleiderer,  Das  Urchrislenthuin,  seine  Schriften  und  Lehren, 
ill  geschichtlichem  Zusammenhaiuj      Berlin,  1887. 

F.  W.  Farrar,  The  Early  Days  of  Christianity.  Various  edi- 
tions.    London  and  New  York. 

P.  Sen AFF,  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  New  York,  1853. 
History  of  the  Christian  Church.     Vol.  I.     New  York,  1882. 

P.  J.  Gloag,  Inti'oduclion  to  the  Johannine  Writings.  London, 
1891. 

O.  Cone,  The  Gospel  and  its  Earliest  Interpretations,  a  Study  of 
the  Teaching  of  Jesus  and  its  Doctrinal  Transformations  in  the 
New  Testament.     New  York,  1893. 


III.     Treatises  or  Essays  on  Special  Topics. 

A.  II.  Franke,  Das  altc  Testament  hei  .Johannes,  ein  Beitrag  zur 
Erkidrung  und  Beurtheilung  der  Johannsischen  Schriften.  Got- 
tingen,  1885. 

T.  D.  Bernard,  The  Central  Teaching  of.  Jesus  Christ,  a  Study 
and  Exposition  of  the  Five  Chapters  of  the  Gospel  according  to 
St.  John,  XI 11  to  XVII  inclusive.  London  and  New  York, 
1892. 


376  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

J.  C.  Hare,  The  Mission  of  the  Comforter.     Boston,  1854 ;  also, 

London  and  New  York. 
B.  F.  Wkstcott,  The  Revelation  of  the  Father,  short  lectures  on 

the  titles  of  the  Lord  in  the  Guspel  of  St.  John.     London  and 

New  York. 
H.  KoiiLER,  Von  der  Welt  zum  Hi7nmelreich,  oder  die  Johanneische 

Darstellung  des    Werkes  Jesu    Christi   synoptisch  geprufl    iind 

ergdnzt.     Halle,  1892. 
-T.  Haring,  Gedunkengang  und  Grundgedanke  des  ersten  Johan- 
f  neshriefes,  in  Theologische  Ahhandlungen  Carl  von  Weizsdcker 

gewidmet.     Freiburg,  i.  B.,  1892. 
A.    Harnack,    Ueher   das    Verhallniss   des    Prologs   des   vierten 

Evanqeliums  zum  ganzen  Werk,  in  the  Zeilschrift  fllr  Tlieologie 

und  kirche,  1892,  pp.  189-231. 
H.   Holtzmann,  Der  Logos  und  der  eingeborene  Gottessohn  im 

vierten  Evangelium  in  the  Zeilschrift  fur  ivissenschaftliche  The- 

ologie,  1893,  pp.  385-407. 


INDEX   OF   TEXTS 


OLD    TESTAMENT 
BOOKS. 


Gen.  ii.  7 

iii,  1  .iq. 
iii.  8  . 
iv.  3  sq. 


VI. 


XV.  1-G 
Ex.  xii.  46    . 
xiii.  2     . 
xxii.  28 
xxviii.  30 
xliv.  27 
xlv.  19    . 
Num.  v.  8     . 
ix.  42 
xxi.  8. 
xxvii.  21 
Lev.  V.  IS     . 

XXV.  9 
Deut.  X.  12  . 
XV.  19 
xvii.  6 
xviii.  15 
xix.  15 
2  Sun.  vii.  14 

1  Kiiic;3  viii.  27 

2  Kings  V.  18 
Job  xi.  19     . 

xxviii.  passi 
Pa.  xxii.  IS  . 

XXV.  11     . 
•    xxxiii.  4 

xxxiii.  (5,  9 

xxxiv.  20 

xlv.  6 

Ixv.  4 

Ixix.  4 

Ixix.  9     . 

Ixxviii.  38 

Ixxix.  9   . 

Ixxxii.  0 

xc.  2  . 

cxix.  89  . 

cxxx.  4    . 

cxlvii.  15 
Prov.  viii   1-4 
viii.  22-30 
viii.  32-3. 
xix.    ll 


Page 

201 

141 

83 

141 

143 

32 

27,  109 

178 

34 

17G 

182 

182 

182 

27,  169 

"     180 

176 

182 

182 

295 

178 

33 

31 

33 

105 

48 

182 

183 

78 

27 

182 

78 

77 

7,  169 

34 

182 

26 

33 

182 

182 

34 

89 

78 

182 

77 

79 

79 

79 

183 


Isa.  ii.  1    .     . 

vi.  9,  10 

xliv.  3   . 

liii.  1      . 

liii.  7      . 

liii.  10-12 

liv.  13    . 

Iv.  1.      . 

Iv.  10,  11 

Iviii.  11  . 
Jer.  xxiii.  29 
Ezek.  xlv.  17 
Dan.  ix.  9 
Hos.  vi.  2 

xi.  1      . 

Zech.  vii.  2  . 

xii.  10 


Page 

87 
26 
26 
26 
169,  170 
170 


26 

77 

26 

78 

182 

182 

40 

105 

183 

28 


GOSPEL   OF  JOHN. 


1 

1-10 
3-18 


88,  90,  91-93 
...  360 

.  .  88  sg. 


3   89,  93 

4  3,  15,  61,  99,  128,  257 
4,5 94 

5  15,  99,  128,  131,  138 

6-9 94 

7  .  .  .  .  99,  228,  236 

9  .  15,  61,  99,  257,  332 

10  .  15,  66,  93,  94,  134 
10,  11 318 

11  .  .  24,  94,  131,  242 

12  107,  226,  242,  243,  304 
12,  13  .  71,  94,  233,  251 

13  ....   242,243 


95,  103, 


96, 


14  . 

14-18 

15  . 

16  ...... 

17 

18  48,49,  70,  90,  103, 

107,  108, 

29    136,138,161, 

168,  ISO,  185,  ISO, 

32 


ISO. 


.  47-51 

i.  11 
i.  16 
i.  17 
,.  19 
.  21 
.  22 


23 
23,  24 
23-25 
.  3  . 


Page 

.  221 
.  226 
.  33 
.  33 
.  40 
38  /sq. 
.     220 


.  .  304 
222,  233 
.  .  207 
.  .  246 
243,  245,  248  sq. 
.  14,  249 
.  .  129 
.  .  236 
.  .  228 


i.  13  .  .  .  .   108,  117 

i.  14  25, 161, 180,  185,  186 

i.  15  .  .  .  180,  228.  325 

i.  16    57,  103,  110,113, 

138,  164,  226,  268,  273 

302,  316,  323 

i.  17  .   G3,  113,  164,  348 

i.  18  .  103,  110,  226,  31)4, 

344,  350 

:.  18-21 164 

;.  19  133, 138,  273,  318, 350 
i.  19-21  64,  OJ,  131,  132 
:.  20,  21 .  .  .  .  .  236 

.21 10 

.  31  .  .  .  .   109,  117 

.  35  55,  70,  103,  109,  268, 

270,  273 

:.  36  .....  .  226 

10-14   ....  316 

.  20-24  ...  42,  43 
.  22  .  .  24,  36,  13S,  165 
.  23  .  .  .  .  .  47,  70 

.24 46 

.31 294 

.34 315 

.  39  ......  233 

.  39^2   ....  222 

.  40  ......  294 

.  42  .  .  .  .   165,  302 

.  44  ......  138 

.47 294 

2-20 62 

16,  17 37 

17  .....  ,   55 


378 


INDEX   OF   TEXTS 


V.  17  sq. 
V.  18,  19 
V.  19  . 
V.  19-21 
V.  19-27 
V.  19-29 
V.  20  . 
V.  21 

V.  22  . 
V.  23  . 
V.  24  . 
V.  24,  25 
V.  26  . 
V.  27  . 


V.  30  . 
V.  30-17 
V.  34  . 
V.  35  . 
V.  37  .«/. 
V.  37-40 
V.  38-40 
V.  42  . 
V.  43  . 
V.  44  . 
V.  45  . 
V.  45-47 
V.  40 
V.  40,  47 
vi.  1-14 
vi.  22-05 
vi.  20-31 
vi.  28,  29 
vi.  29  . 
vi.  31-34 
vi.  32  . 
vi.  32  sq. 
vi.  33 
vi.  35  . 
vi.  38  . 
vi.  39  . 
vi.  40 

vi.  41  . 

vi.  44  . 

vi.  45  . 

vi.  40  . 

vi  47  . 

vi.  50  . 
vi.  51 

vi.  52-59 
vi.  53  . 
vi.  54  . 
vi.  50  , 
vi.  57  . 
vi.  58  . 
vi.  0-.:  . 
vi.  03  . 
vi.  70  . 
vii.  19 


Page 

...   70 

...  110 

38,  114,  157 

...  235 

.  00,  150  sq. 

.      .341  sq. 

55,  111,  157 

111,  157,  209,  270, 

323,  324 

111,  157,  349,  351 

.  64,  157,  349 

.  157,  310,  323 

313 

59,  157,"  310,  324 

64,  157,  349,  351 

111,  158 

.  64,348 

.  .  237 

138,  105 

.  .   30 

.  31,  50 

.  .  321 

.  43,44 

.  .  273 

.  .  304 

.  .   51 

.  .   30 

.  30,  31 

.  .   31 

.  .  220 

.  158  sq. 

Ill,  112 

.  .  158 

.  .  228 

.  .  315 

.  .  101 

.  .  159 

.  .  230 

227 

159,  227,'  233,  310 

.  117 

315,  333,  340 

20,  227,  313,  315, 

324,  333,  340 

.  .   1.59,  102 

.  .   159,  340 

25,  159,  227,  230 

.  103,  112,  230 

159,  227,  228,  233, 

239,  313 

.  .  .   227,  320 

159,  100,171,174, 

180,227,  320 

.  .  201 


vii.  20 
vii.  22 
vii.  37 
vii.  38 
viii.  12 
viii.  12-30 
viii.  15 
viii.  10 
viii.  17 
viii.  21 
viii.  23 
viii.  24 
viii.  20 
viii.  28 
viii.  30-32 
viii.  32 
viii.  33-36 
viii.  34 
viii.  42 
viii.  43 
viii.  44 
viii.  45,  46 
viii.  47 
viii.  48 
viii.  52 
viii.  53 
viii.  55 
viii.  50 
viii.  58 

ix.  2,  3 

ix.  5 

ix.  39  . 

ix.  41  . 


01, 


89,  I 


03, 


159,  101 
159,  313,  324,  340 
.  159,  305 
CO,  114,  310 
...  320 
...  117 
.  130,  315 
...  139 
...   30 


X.  9  . 

X.  11  . 

X.  15  . 

X.  10  . 

X.  17  . 

X.  18  . 

X.  20  . 

X.  25  . 

X.  28  . 

X.  30  . 

X.  34  . 
X.  34-30 

X.  37,  38 
X.  38 

xi.  3  . 

xi.  5  . 


xi.  23-20 
xi.  24  . 


xi.  34 

xi.  36  . 
xi.  47-53 
xi.  48  . 
xi.  49-52 
xi.  51  . 
xii.  1  . 


Page 

139 

,   33 

,  310 


99,  128,  132 
223 

63,  157,  347 
.  04,  348 
.  33,  35 
.  .  130 
.  .  134 
.  .  130 
.  .  348 
.  180,  186 
.  .  223 
.  .  135 
.  .  135 
.  .  130 
.  8,  270 
.  .  8 
.  140,  141 
.  .  220 
.  8,  250 
.  .  139 
.  139,  320 
.  .  121 
,  00,  318 
.  32,  121 

3,  117,  120- 

,  137 
99 

04,  135,  348 
.  64,  348 
.  .  3( 
.  .  105 
.  172, 174 
.  24,  172 
.  .  250 

50,  172,  208 
.  172 
.  139 
.  304 


Page 

xii.  3  .  .  . 

.  288 

xii.  9  .  .  . 

.  346 

xii.  13   .  . 

.  304 

xii.  16   .  . 

.  209 

xii.  17   .  . 

.  346 

xii.  24 

.  179 

xii.  25   .  . 

.  180 

xii.  26   .  . 

.  180 

xii.  31   134 

210, 

349,  352 

xii.  32   .  . 

180, 

185,  186 

xii.  33   .  . 

.  180 

xii.  34   .  . 

, 

.  180 

xii.  35   .  . 

99, 

128,  132 

xii.  30   .  . 

99,  132 

xii.  38-41   . 

.   20 

xii.  41-43   . 

.  237 

xii.  44   .  . 

.  226 

xii.  44-40  ....  227 
xii.  46  99, 128, 132, 133, 138 
xii.  47  03,  133,  138,  157, 
164,  302,  347,  350 
340,  350,  353 


■!,  103,  114 
.  .  35 
.  .  34 
.  .  220 
.115,224 
.  209,  270 
.  208-270 
.  .  295 
.  345,  340 
.  333,  340 
315,  326,  341 
133,  219 
.  172 
2(  9,  270 
175  sg. 

.    i(;8 

255,  256 
.  1S5 
.     340 


xii.  48 
xii.  50 
xiii.  1  . 
xiii.  2  . 
xiii.  3  . 
xiii.  3-5 
xiii.  4  . 
xiii.  10 
xiii.  19 
xiii.  23 
xiii.  34 
xiii.  34,  35 
xiii.  37 
xiii.  37,  38 
xiv.  1  . 
xiv.  3  . 
xiv.  5  . 
xiv.  6  . 
xiv.  7  . 
xiv.  9  . 
xiv.  9,  10 
xiv.  11 
xiv.  13 
xiv.  14 
xiv.  15 
xiv.  15  sq. 
xiv.  10 


315 
,  209,  273 
.  .  139 
,  1.5,289 
.     .    288 


xiv.  17 

xiv.  18 

xiv.  19 
xiv.  20 
xiv.  21 
xiv.  21,  22 
xiv.  21 -i3 
xiv.  21-28 
xiv.  23 
xiv.  24 
xiv.  20 


...  172 
...   13 

.  .  .  228 
...  209 
.   209, 270 
...  273 
...  173 
.  .  .  172 
.   220,  232 
331  sq.,  339 
.  .  .  300 
192,  200,  315 
...  318 
.  4,  49,  114 
...  237 
103,  114,  224 
292,  299,  310 
,  305,  SCO,  310 
...  283 
.  2TO 
190,  191,  194, 
291,298,  299 
134,191,195,319, 
334 
193, 199,  202, 333, 
335 
194,  199,  2C2,  334 
200,  202,  203,  305 
.  2C9,  273,  289 
....  203 
.  .  .  08,273 
....  273 
.  58,  209,  333. 334 
.  .  289 
100,194,196,204, 
205,  207,  298,  304 


INDEX  OF   TEXTS 


379 


xiv.  28 
xiv.  30 
xiv.  31 
XV.  1  sq. 
XV.  2  . 
XV.  i  sq. 
XV.  5 


Page 
110,  333-335  xvii.  20 
...     134  xvii.  21 
.       209,  273  xvii.  22 
230,  259,  2G0  xvii.  23 
.     .     .     1G8 
...    305 
.     .     .     2G0 


XV, 

XV.  9 
XV.  12 
XV.  13 


7    ....     .  304,  311 


56,  208,  277 
.     .     .  277,  315 
172, 173, 177, 185, 
287 
XV.  IG       .     .     70,  303,  310 

XV.  17 '^TO 

XV.  18,  19      ....    135 

XV.  19 11 

XV.  24 27 

XV.  25       ....     24,  3o 

XV  2G       190,  191,  192,194, 

195, 19G,  197, 205, 

207,  303 'xix.  41 
XV.  27       197  j  XX.  1  sq 


xvii.  23-20 

xvii.  24  . 

xvii.  25  . 
xvii.  2G 

xviii.  14  . 

xvlil.  18  . 

xviii.  36  . 

xviii.  37  . 

xviii.  39  . 

xix.  24  . 
xix.  26 

xix.  31  . 
xix.  36 

xix.  37  . 

xix.  38  . 


Page 

.     .     .     .  292,  300 

115,  220,  301,  302 

.     .     .      IIG,  201 

58,201,269,277, 

301 

.     .     .     .     2G8 

55,  90,  116,  133 

.     G3,  134,  171 

.    301,303,319 

.     .     .     =     17G 


xvi.  3 
xvi.  5 
xvi.  7 


.  300 
.  134 
.  10 
.    315 

.  27 
.  2G9 
.  168 
27,  1G9 
.  28 
.  168 
.  172 
.  346 
172,  2G9liii.  3 
---'-■-   4 


ii.  8-10  .  .  .  100,  132 
ii.  10,  11   .     .     .     .     .     280 

ii.  12 186 

ii.  13,  14 123 

ii.  15 273 

ii.  15,  16        ...     8,  134 

ii.  15-17 280 

ii.  10 130 

ii.  18  145,  148,  200,  330,  339 
ii.  20  .  .  .  .  .  22,  206 
ii.  21  ....  .  10,  206 
ii.  22  .  .  ,  145, 219,  234 
ii.  23 148 


ii.  24 
ii.  27 
ii.  27, 
ii.  28 
ii.  29 
iii.  1 


319  XX.  2 

306  XX.  13 172|iii 

190, 195, 19G,  206, '  XX  15 
208,  214,  303,  335  xx.  22 
xvi.  8  .  190,  197,  21G,  352  xx.  23 
xvi.  8,9.  .  .  .  135,  138  xx.  24-29 
xvi  8-11  .  .  .210  sq.  xx.  29 
xvi  11     ....  352' XX.  31   100,105,219,304 

xvi'  12    ....  209  xxi.  7   ■-^69 

xxi.  15*?.  .  .  .270-272 

xxi.  17 33C 

xxi.  19 33G 

xxi.  20 2G9 

xxi.  22  .  .  333,  337,  339 


258 

......  207 

28  .  .  194,  202,  258 

.  .  .  333,  339,  353 

.  .   12,  G4,  05,  244 

57,70,71,254,273, 

280,  286,  319 

iii.  2 254,  280 

iii.  2,  3  .  .  203,  330,  331 

.  280 

127,  136 

1721  iii.  5 107,168 

194,  201  iii.  6  .  .  .  13,  137,  259 

.  136|iii.  0-9 171 

.  2251  iii.  7  .  .   10,13,65,265 
207  iii.  8  .  .  8,  136,  140,  141 


xv\.  13 


196, 197,  205,  206, 
207 
xvi.  13  sq.  .  .  .  192,  303 
xvi.  14  ...  .  195-197 
xvi.  14,15  .  .  .195,205 
xvi.  16  194,  197,  200,  335 
xvi.  17   .  .  .  .195,197 

xvi.  18 306 

xvi.  19 306 

xvi  '^*-i    ,,<>••  OoD 

xvi!  22  sq.     .     .     .  332,  336 
xvi.  23 


FIRST  EPISTLE   OF 
JOHN. 


iii.  9    13,  136,  137,  244,  280 


9,10 71 

iii.  10  .  8,  140,  254,  281 
iii.  10-14  ....  273 
iii.  11,  12  ....  281 
iii.  14  ....  138,  281 
iii.  16  172,173,178,185, 
273,  286,  287,  369 

iii.  17 281 

iii.  19 S,  10 


iii.  19,  20 
iii.  21 


i.  1  .     .     .     .     8i),  100,  122 

70,291,292,299,1.1,2        99 

304,  305-310  1.  1-4 61 

xvi.  23,24  ....  3071.  2  ....  3,67,123 
xvi  24  ...  .  298,  302  i.  3  .....  67,  2C0 
xvi!  26  195, 197, 298, 299,  1.  5  3,  5,  47,  60,  61,  100, 
302,305,3101  132 

.  58,  269,  270,  298  i.  5  sq 5 

.     .   116,  117,  133  1.  6       ...      10,  128, 132 

.     .     .    306  1.7    100,  132,  106-168,  176,1  iv 

305  186  " 

.    51,  66,  239,  315  i.  8 ICG 

90,  107,  113,  116,  i.  8-10 13 

117,  119,  120,  133  1.  9  04,  05, 136, 137, 166,  186 
303  i.  10 137 


xvi. 

27 

xvi. 

28 

XVI. 

30 

xvi. 

33 

XVII 

3 

xvu 

5 

xvii 

.6 

XVII 

.9 

IV.  -Z 
iv.  3 
iv.  4 


iv.  6 
Iv.  7 


iv.  9  . 
iv.  9-11 
iv.  10 


.   292,  299,  300  ii.  1 

xvii.  11  ...     .   6.3,  303  ii.  2 

xvii.  12 24  ii.  4 

xvii.  14  .     .     .     '     ■     134  ii- 5 

xvii.  15 IGSii.  5,  6       .....     2581V.  13 

xvii.  17 1-9  ii-  7-11 

xvii.  19  .     .   178,179,186  11.  8 


70,  170,  185,  192 
.     181,184,185 

lOliv.  11 

.     .     .     .     .     273ilv.  12 


5  iv.  14 
108,  128,  369 1  iv.  15 


68-70 
192 

292 

260 

203 

95,  234 

145, 148 

8,  IIG 

8,  IIG 

.....      8,  192 

52,  67,  244,  277,  371 

8     ...    6,  66,  369 

21 5 

.  47,  52,  54,  274  sq., 
319 
.     ,     .     =     0     .     103 
.....      57 
161, 181, 184, 18.5, 
209,  273 
....  209,  273 
.     .     49,  260,  274 
....  106,  2.59 
....  138,  1G5 
.    •    166, 219,  234 


380 


INDEX   OF   TEXTS 


Page 

■.  16      52,  55,  239, 259,  274 

sq.,  28G,  309 

'.17 340,  353 

'.19 58 

,  1      .     219,  243,  245,  251 
,1,2      ....  254,  273 

,  1^  ......     235 

,4      ...   218,  234,  245 

,5 234 

,6 14G 

,7 192,  207 

,8 238,  249 

9 234 

10,  11    .     .     .     .     ,     239 

,11 325 

12     .     .     .   228, 233,  234 

14 311 

10 297 

10,  17   .  136,  145,  149  sq. 

18 243,  240 

19 134,  138 

20    .     .     .     51,  305,  322 


SECOND  EPISTLE   OF 

JOHN. 
2      .......      95 

3,  4 70 

4 10,  192 

7      .     .     .     .    145,  140,  148 


THIRD   EPISTLE   OF 
JOHN. 


3,4 


OTHER  NEW  TESTA- 
MENT  BOOKS. 


Matt.  V.  12  , 
vi.  20 
X.  23 
xi.  27 


.  118.  119 
.  .118 
.  .  339 
.     .     112 


Page 

Page 

Matt.  xii.  31  sq. 

.     ,     152 

Phil.  i.  23     ....    332 

xvi.  16     . 

.     .     105 

ii.  8,  9       . 

.     181 

xvi.  27,  28 

.     .    340 

Col.  i.  10,  17      . 

.      93 

XX.  28      . 

.     172 

2  Thess.  ii.  3,  0,  7 

.     147 

xxiv.  13,  14 

.     339 

1  Tim.  ii.  G   .     . 

.     .     172 

xxiv.  29  sq. 

.     339 

1  Tim.  iii.  0      .     . 

.     144 

XXV.  34 

.     .     119 

.     246 

xxvi.  01 

.     .      40 

Heb.  i.V,?.      ', 

.      93 

xxvi.  03 

.     .     1C5 

ii.  2       .     . 

.      85 

xxvi.  C4 

.     .     340 

ii.  17     .     . 

.     182 

Mark  i.  4      .     . 

.     .     250 

ii.  17,  18    . 

.     352 

i.  8      .    . 

.     .    250 

iv.  15    .     . 

.     352 

iii.  22  sq. 

.     .     152 

vi.  1      .     . 

.     187 

vii.  18      . 

.     .     209 

vi.  4-8       . 

.     154 

vli.  26      . 

.     .     294 

X.  20-31     . 

.     154 

ix.  1     .     . 

.     310 

James  i.  27   .     . 

.    .246 

X.  30    .     . 

.     .     313 

iv.  4  .     . 

.     2C7 

xiii.  20     . 

.     .     340 

1  Pet.  i.  19    .    . 

.     170 

xiii.  24      . 

.     .     339 

iii.  15  .     . 

.     295 

xiv.  58 

.     .      40 

2Pet  ii.  4    .     . 

.     142 

Luke  1.  03     .     . 

.     .     295 

Jude4      .     .     . 

142, 143 

vii.  3    .     . 

.     294 

14  sq.     .     , 

.     143 

viii.  37     . 

.     294 

Rev.  v.  12     .     . 

.     170 

ix.  27 

.     340 

vii.  14  .     . 

.     170 

ix.  54 

.     210 

xiii.  1  sq. 

.     147 

X.  18    .     . 

144,  353 

XX.  2     .    . 

.     141 

X.  22    .     . 

.     112 

xii.  10      . 

.     152 

xii.  48      . 

.     295 

APOCRYPHAL   BOOKS. 

xviii.  13    . 

.     182 

xviii.  30   . 

.     313 

Wisdom  of  Solomon  vi.   22, 

xxi.  32     .     . 

339,  340 

81 

Acts  vi.  13,  14  . 

.      41 

vii.  21      ...      81 

vii.  35  .     . 

.      85 

vii.  24     .      .     .      81 

xxi.  29      .     . 

.     295 

vii.  25-29     .     .      82 

Rom.  i.  17    .     .     . 

.     235 

viii.  4  .        .81,  82 

X.  9      .     .     . 

.     204 

Ecclus.  i.  1,  4,  9,  20    .      80 

1  Cor.  V.  7     .     . 

.    iro 

xxiv.  3-10       80,  81 

xii.  3       .     . 

204,  234 

Fourth  E.h!i  as  vii.  28  sq.  105 

2  Cor.  V.  16 

.     225 

xiii.  37  6(/.     105 

Gal.  iii.  9       .     . 

.     140 

xiv.  9       .     105 

iii.  19     .     , 

.      85 

Enoch  xii.  4      ...     143 

iii.  29     .     . 

.     140 

XV.  3       ...     143 

Eph.  i.  3  sq. 

.     205 

Ixiv.  2    .         ,     143 

V.  2       .     . 

.     178 

cv  2 

.     105 

GENERAL   INDEX 


Abbot,  E.,  cited,  viii,  108,290;   on 

the  words  for  pra3'er  in  John,  293, 

296,  308. 
Abiding  in  Christ,  258  $q. 
Adam  of  St.  Victor,  hymn  com- 

mon)}'  attributed  to,  cited,  211. 
Adeney,  W.  F.,  cited,  374. 
Alexandrian  Philosophy,  see  Philo. 
Alford,  H.,  cited,  246,  250, 292,  308, 

332,  336,  337. 
Antichrist,    doctrine    of,    in    John, 

145  sq. 
AufiUSTiNE,  cited,  150,  160, 199,  336, 

352. 


Ballentine,  W.  G.,  cited,  266;  on 
the  words  meaning  to  love  in  John, 
272. 

Baur,  F.  C,  cited,  46,  74,  75,  127, 
156,  189,  241,  266,  312,  328,  352, 
355,  374. 

'"Beast,"  the,  in  Revelation,  how 
different  from  "Antichrist"  in 
John,  147. 

Begetting,  the  divine,  242  sq. ;  born 
of  water  and  Spirit,  249  sq. 

Benevolence,  its  relation  to  justice  in 
God,  53,  54. 

Bengel,  cited,  150. 

Bernard,  T.  D.,  cited,  189,  290,  375. 

Beyschlag,  W.,  cited.  1,  22,  46,  76, 
90,  92,  102,  104,  127,  133,  156,  189, 
218;  on  the  doctrine  of  faith  in 
John,  231,2-32;  cited,  242,  252,  266, 
312,  316,  328,  332;  on  the  judg- 
ment, 351,  352,  374. 

Beza,  cited,  152. 


Bibliograph}',  373;  cf.  Preface,  p.  xi. 
Birth  from  above  or  from  God,  see 

Begetting. 
Blood,  of  Christ,  theories  respecting 

the  meaning  of,  in  eh.  vi.,  159-164. 
Burton,  E.  D.,  cited,  315. 


Caiaphas,  his  view  of  Jesus'  death, 
175,  176,  255. 

Calvi.x,  cited,  152,  249,  256. 

Charljcs,  R.  H.,  his  edition  of  the 
Book  of  Enoch,  cited,  143. 

Children  of  God,  outside  Judaism, 
255. 

Childship  to  God,251-255. 

Christ,  his  work  grounded  by  John 
in  his  person,  3,  4;  God's  love  for, 
55-57;  the  doctrine  of  his  person  in 
the  prologue  of  John's  Gospel, 
88  sg./  creation  ascribed  to,  93; 
incarnation  of,  95;  his  union  with 
the  Father,  102  sq.  ;  meaning  of 
the  title  Son  of  God  as  applied  to, 
102  sq.;  meaning  of  "only-begot- 
ten Son,"  106  sq. ;  his  pre-exist- 
ence,  115-122;  charged  with  using 
demoniacal  power  by  the  Pharisees, 
139;  as  the  giver  of  life,  156  sq.  ; 
as  the  Lamb  of  God,  168-170;  his 
death  on  behalf  of  men,  171-177, 
"sanctifies  himself  "  for  men,  178, 
179;  his  lifting  up  from  the  cross, 
180,  181 ;  as  a  propitiation  for  sin, 
181-188;  sends  the  Holy  Spirit, 
VdQl  sq.  ;  abiding  in,  258  sg.  ,•  eating 
the  flesh  of,  &c.,  261;  fellowship 
with,    262    sq.  ;    the    prayers    of, 


382 


GENERAL  INDEX 


298  sq. ;  eternal  life  derived  from, 
314  sq.  ;  his  "coming,"  331  sq. ; 
his  function  of  judgment,  3-lG  sq. 

Cone,  O.,  cited,  viii,  1,  375. 

Comforter^  see  Spirit. 

Ckemek,  H.,  on  the  sonship  of  Christ, 
VIC-,,  182:  cited,  267;  on  tlie  differ- 
ence between  aireii' and  epwrai',  296. 

Cross,  Christ  lifted  up  upon  the,  180, 
181. 


"  Day,  the  last,"  340. 

Davidson,  S.,  cited,  viii. 

Deatli,  of  Christ,  on  behalf  of  men, 
171-179. 

Demoniacal  Possession,  in  John  and 
in  the  Synoptics,  139. 

De  Wette,  cited,  69,91,1 52, 167, 178, 
201,  250,  257,  308,  334,  338,  342. 

DoDs,  M.,  cited,  189. 

DoRNEK,  I.  A.,  on  the  theological  sig- 
nificance of  the  idea  of  love,  275. 

Drummond,  J.  cited,  75. 

Dualism,  in  John,  the  nature  of, 
129  sq.  ;  supposed  bearing  of,  upon 
the  authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel, 132,  133 

DijSTERDiECK,  F.,  cited,  150. 

DwiGiiT,  T.  cited,  ix,  70,  154,  155; 
on  the  conviction  concerning  sin 
wrought  by  the  Spirit,  215;  cited, 
257;  on  the  meaning  of  xvi.  23, 
309 ;  cited,  334. 


Ebrard,  J.   H.   A.,  cited,  69,    150, 

153,  199,  335. 
Ecclesiasticus,  doctrine  of  ■wisdom  in, 

80  57. 
Enocli,    Book    of,    its  bearing   upon 

the  doctrine  of  the  fall  of  Satan, 

143  sq. 
Eschatology,  the  Johannine,  328  sq. 
"Eternal,"  meaning  of  the  term  in 

John,  322  sq.     See  Life. 
EwAi.p,  H.,  cited,  189,  332,  334,  336, 

337,  374. 


Fairbaikn,  a.  M.,  on  the  theological 
significance  of  the  idea  of  love, 
287. 

Faith.  Doctrine  of,  in  John,  218;  in 
tlie  sense  of  believing  that  a  tiling 
is  true,  219,  220;  gradation  in.  221- 
226;  constructions  whicli  express 
the  idea,  226-228;  various  opinions 
respecting  the  nature  of,  228-235; 
its  grounds,  235-238;  doctrine  of, 
in  Paul  and  in  John,  compared, 
367  sq. 

Fall  of  Satan,  whether  taught  in  New 
Test.,  142  sq. 

Farrae,  F.  W.,  cited,  1,  155. 

Fellowship  with  Christ,  260  sq. 

Flesh,  contrasted  with  Spirit,  in 
John,  12955.;  "flesh  and  blood," 
of  Christ,  to  be  eaten  and  drunken, 
158-164,  261. 

Franke,  a.  H.,  cited,  22,  375. 

Feommann,  K.,  cited,  74,  102,  127; 
on  John's  doctrine  of  Satan,  144, 
145, 156,  201,  218 ;  on  faith  in  John, 
231;  cited,  328,  355,  373. 


Gess,  W.  F.,  cited,  107. 

God,  his  ethical  nature,  5;  meaning 
of  the  phrase,  "to  be  of  God,"  8; 
idea  of,  m  John's  writings,  46  sq. ; 
as  spirit,  46-48;  as  invisible,  48- 
50;  "the  true,"  50,  51;  as  love, 
52-55;  his  love  for  the  Son,  55-57; 
for  the  world,  57,  58;  for  believ- 
ers, 58,  59;  as  the  giver  of  life  to 
men,  59,  60;  as  light,  60-62;  as 
righteous,  63;  his  retributive  jus- 
tice, 63-65;  knowledge  of,  how 
attained,  65-68;  the  representation 
of  him  in  I.  ii'i.  19,  20,  68-70;  his 
Fatherhood,  70-73;  idea  of,  in  Paul 
and  in  John,  compared,  357  sq. 

GoDET,  F.,  cited,  22,  75,  76,  91,  160, 
168,  170.  199,  201,  250,  256,  257, 
262,  269,  307,  308,  332,  334,  337, 
342,  344. 

Gloag,  p.  J.,  cited,  1,  74. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


383 


Haking.  T.,  citec],  376. 

Hare,  J.  C,  cited,  189;  on  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Spirit's  work  to  faith  in 
Christ,  208:  cited,  213,  376. 

Hahnack,  a.,  cited,  76;  on  the  rela- 
tion of  the  prologue  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel  as  a  whole,  101,  159,  376. 

Haupt,  E.,  cited,  1;  on  John's  con- 
ception of  history,  11;  on  God  as 
light  and  as  love,  60 ;  cited,  67,  69, 
70,  152,  167,  246,  373. 

Hr.iNZE,  M.,  cited,  75. 

Hengstenbeug,  cited,  336. 

HiLGENFELD,  A.,  cited,  255,  373. 

Hofmann,  J.  C.  K.,  cited,  199,  332, 
334,  3.36. 

HoLTZBiANN,  H.  J.,  cited,  viu,  67, 
149,  154,  159,  178,  199,  201,  246, 
250,  256,  270,  308,  332,  334,  338, 
344,  352. 

HoLTZMANN,  0.,  Cited,  22;  on  the 
Logos  doctrine  of  John,  99,  100; 
cited,  308,  373. 

HoRToN,  K.  F.,  cited,  1. 

HuTHER,  J.  E.,  cited,  67,  69,  70,  152, 
167,  246. 

HuTTON,  R.  H.,  cited,  ix. 


Jews,  tlieir  relation  to  the  Messianic 
salvation,  24;  their  view  of  the 
Sabbath  law,  37,  38;  their  real 
ignorance  of  Scripture,  43  sq. 

John,  the  theology  of,  its  peculiari- 
ties, 1  sq. ;  its  tendency  to  group  it.s 
thoughts  around  central  truths,  2 
sq. ;  regards  man  as  a  unit,  8  sq. ; 
the  breadth  of  its  ideas,  9  sq. ;  its 
realism,  11;  its  antitheses,  12;  its 
idea  of  religion,  12  sq. ;  on  the  rela- 
tion of  the  temporal  and  the  eternal, 
13,  14;  its  spiritual  character,  14, 
15;  compared  with  Paul's  theology, 
16  sq. ;  its  bearing  on  the  union  of 
doctrine  and  life,  18  sq. ;  its  bear- 
ing on  Christian  unity,  20,  21 ;  his 
view  of  tlie  Old  Test.,  22  sq.  ,  his 
doctrine  of  God,  46  sq.  ,  his  doc- 


trine of  the  Logos,  74  sq.  ;  his  teach- 
ing respecting  the  relation  of  the 
Son  to  the  Father,  102  sq.  ;  his 
doctrine  of  Christ's  pre-existence, 
115  sq. ;  his  doctrine  of  sin,  127  sg.  ; 
his  "dualism,"  129  sq.  ;  his  doc- 
trine of  salvation,  156  sq.  ;  his 
teaching  concerning  the  Holy 
Spirit,  189  sq  ;  his  symbol  the 
eagle,  210;  his  doctrine  of  faith, 
218  sq. ;  his  doctrine  of  the  spirit- 
ual life,  24]  sq.  ;  his  practical  re- 
ligious conceptions,  263-265;  his 
doctrine  of  prayer,  290  sq. ;  his 
idea  of  "eternal  life,"  312  sq. ; 
his  eschatology,  328  sq.  ;  his  doc- 
trine of  the  "coming"  of  Christ, 
331  sq. ;  of  the  resurrection,  340  sq.  ,- 
of  the  judgment,  346  sq.  ;  his  tiie- 
ology  and  Paul's  compared,  355  sq. 
Judgment,  the,  doctrine  of,  in  John, 
346  sq. 


Keil  and  Delitzsch,  cited,  28. 
Keim,  T.,  cited,  viii,  201. 
Knowledge  of  God  and  of  Christ,  as 

connected    witli     "eternal     life," 

314  sq. 
KiiiiLER,  H.,  cited,  376. 
KiJSTLiN,  K.  R.,  cited,  1, 46,  156, 189, 

373. 


Lamb  of  God,  meaning  of,  in  John, 

168  sq. 
Lange,  J.  P.,  cited,  160,  190,  199, 

201,  308,  331,  332,  334,  335,  337, 

355,  .375. 
Lechlee,  G.  v.,  cited,  46,  127,  201, 

241,  336,  355,  375. 
Lias,  J,  J.,  cited,  46,  74,  -873. 
LiDDON,  H.  P.,  cited,  74,  76,  102. 
Life,  God  the  giver  of,  59,  60;  la3^ing 

down  of,  b}'  Christ,  for  men,  171  sq.  ; 

the  spiritual,  241  sq.  ^   "eternal," 

doctrine  of,  312  sq. 
Light,  its  meaning  'n  John,  0;  as  a 


384 


GENERAL  INDEX 


name  for  God's  nature,  60-62;  ron- 
trasted  with  darkness  in  John, 
128  sq. 

LiGiiTFOOT,  J.,  on  the  meaning  of 
"eating  the  flesh  and  drinking  the 
blood  of  tlie  Son  of  man,"  163. 

LiGHTFooT,  J.  B.,  cited,  viii,  292. 

LiPSius,  R.  A.,  cited,  74. 

Logos,  John's  doctrine  of  the,  74  sq.  ; 
Jewish  or  Alexandrian  in  origin, 
76  sq.  ;  roots  of,  in  the  0.  T.,  77- 
79;  in  Apocryphal  books,  79  sq.  ; 
doctrine  of,  in  the  Targums,  82, 
83;  in  Philo,  83  sq.  ;  John's  and 
Philo's  doctrine  of,  compared,  96 
sq. ;  purpose  of,  in  John,  historical 
and  practical,  100  sq. 

Love,  its  place  in  John's  teaching, 
4,  5;  synonymous  with  light,  5; 
considered  as  the  ethical  nature  of 
God,  52-55 ;  John's  doctrine  of, 
266  sq.  ,  words  denoting,  266-2T2; 
subjects  and  objects  of,  272-274 ; 
as  the  ethical  nature  of  God,  274  sq. ; 
characteristics  of,  276  sq  ;  whether 
a  subordinate  attribute  of  God  and 
optional  as  to  its  exercise,  282-287 ; 
doctrine  of,  in  Paul  and  in  John, 
compared,  368  sq. 

LiJCKE,  F.,  cited,  67,  69,  74-76,  91, 
92,  152,  167,  178,  199,  201,2.56,  257, 
308,  332,  334,  338,  342,  344. 

LuTiiARDT,  C.  E.,  cited,  76,  107,  256, 
3.32,  334,  337,  344. 

LuTHEK,  cited,  256,  336,  352. 


Man,  a  unit  in  all  his  powers,  8,  9; 
"  man  of  sin  "  in  Paul,  how  differ- 
ent from  "antichrist,"  in  John, 
147. 

Maurice,  F.  D.,  on  the  true  basis  of 
Christian  fellowship,  21 ;  cited,  189, 
374. 

Memra,  the  doctrine  of,  in  the  Tar- 
gums, 82,  83. 

Mercy,  the  divine,  its  relation  to  jus- 
tice, 53,  54. 


Messner,  H.,  cited,  34,  127,  189, 
206,  328,  355,  374. 

Meyer,  H.  A.  W.,  on  John  ii.  21, 
38  sq.;  cited,  75,  76,  90,  107.  114, 
140,  160,  168,  172,  173,  178,  199, 
201,  205,  250,  256,  257,  262,  269, 
270,  308,  325,  332,  334,  338,  342, 
344,  345,  351. 

MiJLLER,  J.,  on  the  nature  of  love, 
275. 

Murphy,  J.  J.,  cited,  355. 

Name,  prayei  in  Christ's,  298,  302- 

305. 
Neanuer,  a.,  cited,  1,  69,  179,  201, 

218;  his   view   of  faith   in   John, 

231 ;  cited,  328,  332,  375. 
NiTzscH,  K.  L,  on   the  doctrine  of 

love,  275. 

Old  Testament,  John's  teaching  con- 
cerning, 22  sq. ,  preparatory  to  the 
Gospel,  22,  23;  the  necessity  tliat 
its  prophecies  be  fulfilled,  24-29; 
its  unity  and  inspiration,  25;  John's 
method  of  interpreting  it,  29,  30; 
its  Messianic  import,  30  sq. ;  John's 
alleged  hostilitj'  to,  34  sq. ;  con- 
trast, according  to  John,  between 
Jesus'  views  of,  and  the  popular 
opinions,  37,  38;  the  Jews'  real 
ignorance  of,  43,  44 ;  Jesus,  the 
fulfilment  of,  44,  45;  basis  of  the 
Logos-doctrine  in,  77-79. 

Olshausen,  H.,  cited,  201,  337,  342. 

Paraclete,  Christ  represented  as,  170, 
171 ,  see  also  Spirit. 

Park,  E.  A.,  cited,  266,  286. 

Parousia,  doctrine  of,  in  John,  329  sq. 

Patton,  F.  L.,  on  the  relation  of 
justice  and  benevolence  in  God,  53. 

Paul,  his  legalism  compared  with 
John's  tj'pe  of  thought,  15  sq.  ,•  his 
theology  and  that  of  John  com- 
pared, 355  sq. 


GENERAL   INDEX 


385 


Pauline  Apocalypse,  the  (2  Thess.  ii. 
1-12),  147. 

Feabody,  a.  p.,  cited,  viii ;  on  tlie 
meaning  of  xxi.  17  sq.,  338. 

Peyton,  W.  W.,  cited,  374. 

Pfleidkuek,  O.,  cited,  75,  15!J,  375. 

Philo,  his  philosophy,  7G,  77 ;  his 
doctrine  of  the  Logos,  83  sq. 

Plummer,  a.,  cited,  07,  76,  86,  ]27, 
159,  168,  199.  246,  250,  256,  257, 
268,  270,  308,  325,  332,  334,  342, 
352. 

Prayer,  the  doctrine  of,  290  sq.  ; 
words  used  by  John  to  express  idea 
of,  291  sq.;  the  prayers  of  Christ, 
298  sq. ;  of  the  disciples,  302  sq. ; 
assurances  of  answer  to,  310,  311. 

Pre-existence,  of  Christ,  doctrine  of, 
in  John,  89  sq.,  115  sq. 

Prologue,  of  John's  Gospel,  doctrine 
of  the  Logos  in,  88  sq. 

Prophecy,  as  viewed  in  John,  24,  26- 
29;  necessary  to  distinguish  its 
original  sense  from  its  applications, 
29,  30;  its  Messianic  element  per- 
vading in  the  0.  T.,  30-32;  Jesus' 
appeal  to,  32  sq. 

Propitiation,  doctrine  of,  in  John, 
181-188. 


Religion,  its  nature  and  demands,  6, 
10,  12;  its  inward  spiritual  char- 
acter, 14,  15;  its  relation  to  the- 
ology, 18,  19;  the  Christian,  in 
relation  to  the  0.  T.,  22;  its  con- 
nection with  Jewish  history,  24; 
John's  practical  conceptions  of, 
262-265. 

Resurrection,  doctrine  of,  in  John, 
340  sq. 

Rkuss,  E.,  cited,  1,  46,  74,  76,  89, 
127,  133,  156;  on  John's  doctrine 
of  atonement,  185;  cited,  189;  on 
John's  doctrine  of  the  Spirit,  193, 
197,  198,  201-203 ;  cited,  218,  266, 
312;  on  the  meaning  of  "eternal 
life,"  327;    cited,  328;   on  John's 


escliatology,  329  .'y. ;  cited,  331;  on 

the    resurrection,    341,    343,    345; 

cited,  355. 
Reynolds,  H.  R.,  cited,  332,  334. 
Righteousness,  doctrine  of,  in  John, 

10;  of  God,  63-05. 
RiTsCHL,  A.,  cited,  92. 
RoBEKTsoN,  F.  W.,  cited,  290. 
RoTHE,  R.  cited,  67. 


Salmond,  S.  D.  F.,  cited,  74. 

Salvation,  the  work  of,  according 
to  John,  156  sq.  ,■  doctrine  of,  in 
chs.  V.  and  vi.,  156-104;  the  use  of 
terms  denoting,  164-167 ;  repre- 
sented as  cleansing  from  sin,  160, 
167;  represented  as  the  taking 
away  of  sin,  167  sq. ;  appropria- 
tion of,  according  to  John,  218  sq. ; 
doctrine  of,  in  Paul  and  in  John, 
compared,  360  sq. 

Sanday,  W.,  cited,  viii,  74. 

Sautokius,  E.,  on  the  divine  love, 
57;  cited,  278. 

Satan,  reference  of  sin  to  agency  of, 
in  John,  139  sq. ;  in  what  sense 
sinned  "from  the  beginning,"  140 
sq. ;  supposed  doctrine  of  the  fall 
of,  in  the  New  Test.,  142  sq. 

Sciiaff,  P.,  cited,  272,  355,  373. 

Schiller,  cited,  354. 

Sciniii),  C.  F.,  cited,  241,  374. 

SciiOLTEN,  J.  PL,  cited,  201,  374. 

ScHiJRER,  E.,  cited,  viii,  74. 

Sears,  E.  H.,  cited,  1;  on  Christian 
unity,  20,  21  ;  on  John's  idea  of 
atonement,  185;  cited,  373. 

SiTEDD,  W.  G.  T.,  on  the  divine 
mercy,  53,  54;  on  the  nature  of 
justice  and  of  mercy,  285,  286. 

Sheep,  other,  "  not  of  this  [Jewish] 
fold,"  266,  267. 

Siegfried,  C,  cited,  74,  99. 

Sin,  incompatibilit}'  of,  with  Chris- 
tian life,  13;  John's  doctrine  of, 
127  sq.  ;  definition  of,  127;  repre- 
sented as  darkness,  129;  how  re- 


25 


386 


GENERAL  INDEX 


lated  to  "the  world,"  133  s?.; 
considered  as  bondage,  135  sq. ; 
usage  of  the  words  denoting,  136 
sq. ;  sense  in  which  all  Christians 
do  sin,  and  yet  "cannot  sin,"  137 
sq. ;  its  relation  to  demoniacal 
agencies,  138  sq. ;  referred  to  Sa- 
tan's agency,  139  sq. ;  represented 
as  "antichrist,"  145  sq. ;  "sin 
unto  death,"  meaning  of,  149  sq.  ; 
salvation  from,  156  sq. ;  the  cleans- 
ing from,  etc.,  166  sq. ;  doctrine  of, 
in  Paul  and  in  John,  compared, 
364  sq. 

Son  of  God,  see  Christ. 

Spirit,  contrasted  with  flesh  in  John, 
129  sq.;  the  Holy,  doctrine  of, 
189  sq. ;  designations  of,  in  John, 
190-193;  whether  distinct  from 
Christ,  193  sq. ;  whether  or  not,  a 
person,  195  sq. ;  his  mission  and 
work,  203  sq. ;  is  sent  "  in  Christ's 
name,"  204  sq. ;  his  work  in  the 
apostolic  age,  209;  his  relation  to 
unbelievers,  210  sq. 

Stiek,  R.,  cited,  332. 

Strong,  A.  H.,  on  the  divine  love 
and  justice,  53,  285,  286. 


Targums,  doctrine  of  the  Word  in, 

82,  83. 
Temple,  meaning  of  reference  to  in 

the  words,  "  Destroy  this  temple," 

&c.,  38-42. 
Thayer's  Lexicon,  cited,  267. 
Theology,    John's   contribution    to, 

15  sq. ;  its  relation  to  religion,  18, 

19 ;  of  Paul  and  John,  compared, 

355. 
Theolog}',    Biblical,    its    aim    and 

method,  1,  2. 
Tholuck,  a.,  cited,  108,  193,  199, 

201,  250,  256,  308,  331,  342. 
Thompson,  J.  P.,  cited,  376. 
Tischendorf,  C,  cited,  140,  246. 
Toy,  C.  H  ,  cited,  28. 
Tkegelles,  S.  P.,  cited,  246. 


Trench,  R.  C,  on  the  words  mean- 
ing to  pray  in  John,^292  sq.;  cited, 
307,  308. 


Unity,  Christian,  bearing  of  John's 
teaching  upon,  20,  21. 


Van  Oostekzee,  J.  J.,  cited,  241; 
on  the  significance  of  "  God  is 
love,"  275;  cited,  355,  375. 


Washburn,  E.  A.,  his  translation  of 
Adam  of  St.  Victor's  hymn  to  John, 
cited,  211. 

Watkins,  H.  W.,  cited,  viii,  373. 

Weber,  F.,  cited,  82. 

Weiss,  B.,  cited,  1,  22;  on  John  ii. 
21,  41;  cited,  46;  on  the  knowl- 
edge of  God,  66;  cited,  74,  76,  88, 
90,  102 ;  on  the  meaning  of  Son  oj 
God  in  John,  103  sq. ;  cited,  107, 
127,  140, 154, 156;  on  the  meaning 
of  Christ's  flesh  and  blood  in  ch.  vi. 
162;  cited,  167,  168,  173,  178,  189, 
199,  201,  218 ;  his  view  of  John's 
doctrine  of  faith,  228  sq.  ;  cited, 
241,  246;  on  faith,  252,  253;  cited, 
256,  257,  259,  262,  269-271,  290, 
308,  312,  316,  318,  325,  328,  332, 
334,  336,  338,  342,  344,  352,  373. 

Wendt,  H.  H.,  cited,  22,  32;  on 
John  X.  8,  36;  on  John  ii.  21,  41; 
cited,  46,  72,  102,  104 ;  on  the  pre- 
existence  and  sonship  of  Christ, 
115-122;  cited,  127;  cited,  156;  on 
the  meaning  of  Christ's  flesh  and 
blood  in  ch.  vi,,  162;  cited,  218; 
his  view  of  John's  doctrine  of  faith, 
230;  cited,  241,  266,  312,  316,  328, 
332,  374. 

Weizsacker,  K.,  cited,  76,  88,  99, 
308. 

Westcott,  B.  F.,  cited,  1,  22,  46 
67,69,  70,  75,  91, 108, 127, 149,  151-, 
on  "Sin  unto  death,"  IbO  sq.;  on 


GENERAL   INDEX 


387 


the  meaning  of  Christ's  flesh  and 
blood  m  ch.  vi.,  162;  cited,  168,179, 
182,  190,  199,  204 ;  on  the  convic- 
tion of  the  world  by  the  Spirit,  214; 
cited,  241,  246,  250;  on  childship  in 
John,  253;  cited,  256,  257,  262,  266, 
270;  on  the  doctrine  of  love,  275; 
cited,  290,  292,  308,  312;  on  the 
meaning  of  "eternal  life,"  320; 
cited,  325;  on  the  parousia,  332; 
cited,  336,  337,  342 ;  on  the  judg- 
ment, 352;   cited,  376. 


Westcott  and  Hort,  cited,  108, 
246. 

Whittiek,  J.  G.,  his  poem  Palestine, 
cited,  225,  226. 

Wisdom,  Book  of,  doctrine  of  wis- 
dom in,  81  sq. 

Word,  see  Logos. 

Wordsworth,  C,  cited,  292. 

World,  John's  doctrine  of  the,  133  sq. 


Zeller,  E.,  cited,  75. 


CHRISTIAN    EVIDENCES    AND 
HOMILETICS. 


MANUAL  OF  CHRISTIAN  EVIDENCES.  By  Prof.  GEORGE 
PARK  FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical 
History  in  Yale  College.    16mo,  75  cents. 

The  aim  of  the  book  is  to  present  the  Evidences  of  Christianity  in 
a  concise,  lucid  form,  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  have  not  the  leisure 
to  study  extended  treatises  on  the  subject.  It  is  intended  both  for 
private  reading  and  for  the  use  of  classes  in  public  institutions.  Al- 
though brief,  it  includes  a  distinct  statement  of  both  the  internal  and 
external  proofs.  The  arguments  are  shaped  to  meet  objections  and 
difficulties  which  are  felt  at  the  present  time,  and  the  historic  evidence 
is  carefully  confined  to  the  present  state  of  scholarship  and  learning. 

THE  EXAMINER.— "It  Is  worth  Its  weight  in  gold.  It  la  by  all  odds  the  best 
treatise  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity  for  general  use  that  we  know.  It  is 
sound,  judicious,  clear,  and  scholarly." 

THE  N.  Y.  SUN.— "Compact,  thorough,  and  learned,  its  simplicity  of  style 
and  brevity  ought  to  commend  It  to  a  wide  circle  of  readers." 

THE  GROUNDS  OF  THEISTIC  AND  CHRISTIAN  BELIEF.  By 
Prof.  GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.    Crown  8vo,  $2.50. 

FROM  THE  PREFACE.—"  This  volume  embraces  a  discussion  of  the  evidences 
of  both  natural  and  revealed  religion.  Prominence  Is  given  to  topics  having 
special  Interest  at  present  from  their  connection  with  modem  theories  and  diffi- 
culties. The  argument  of  design,  and  the  bearing  of  evolutionary  doctrines  on 
its  validity,  are  fully  considered." 

JULIUS  H.  SEELYE,  PresiOent  of  Amherst  College.—"!  find  it  as  I  should 
expect  It  to  be,  wise  and  candid,  and  convincing  to  an  honest  mind." 

PROF.  JAMES  O.  MURRAY,  0/Prtncetow  CoZtege.—" It  is  eminently  fitted  to 
meet  the  honest  doubts  of  some  of  our  best  young  men.  Its  fairness  and  candor. 
Its  learning  and  abUlty  In  argument,  its  thorough  handling  of  modem  objections 
—all  these  qualities  fit  it  for  such  a  service,  and  a  great  service  it  is." 

ESSAYS  ON  THE  SUPERNATURAL  ORIGIN  OF  CHRISTIAN- 
ITY. By  Prof.  GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D.,  LLD.  8vo, 
new  and  enlarged  edition,  $2.50. 

THE  NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE.— "His  volume  evinces  rare  versatlUty  of  intellect, 
with  a  scholarship  no  less  sound  and  judicious  In  Its  tone  and  extensive  In  its 
attainments  than  it  Is  modest  in  its  pretensions." 

THE  BRITISH  QUARTERLY  REVIEW.— "We  know  not  where  the  Student  Will 
find  a  more  satisfactory  guide  in  relation  to  the  great  questions  which  have  grown 
up  between  the  friends  of  the  Christian  revelation  and  the  most  able  of  its  assail- 
ants, within  the  memory  of  the  present  generation." 


CHARLES  SGRIBNER'S  SONS' 


THE  PHILOSOPHIC  BASIS  OF  THEISM.  An  Examination  of  the 
Personality  of  Man,  to  Ascertain  his  Capacity  to  Know  and 
Serve  God,  and  the  Validity  of  the  Principle  Underlying  the 
Defence  of  Theism.  By  SAMUEL  HARRIS,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pro- 
fessor of  Systematic  Theology  in  Yale  College.    8vo,  $3.50. 

Dr.  Harris  embodies  in  his  work  the  results  of  his  long  meditation 
on  the  highest  themes,  and  his  long  discussion  and  presentation  of 
these  truths  in  the  class-room.  His  fundamental  positions  are  thor- 
oughly in  harmony  with  soundest  modem  thought  and  most  trust- 
worthy modem  knowledge. 

THE  INDEPENDENT.— "It  la  rare  that  a  work,  which  is  of  necessity,  so 
severely  metaphysical  in  both  topics  and  treatment.  Is  so  enlivened  by  the 
varied  contributions  of  a  widely  cultivated  mind  from  a  liberal  course  of 
reading.  His  passionate  and  candid  argument  cannot  fail  to  command  the 
respect  of  any  antagonist  of  the  Atheistic  or  Agnostic  schools,  who  will  take 
the  pains  to  read  his  criticisms  or  to  review  his  argument.  In  respect  to  coolness 
and  dignity  and  self-possession,  his  work  is  an  excellent  model  for  scientists, 
metaphysicians,  and  theologians  of  every  complexion." 

THE  HARTFORD  COURANT.—" Professor  Harris'  horizon-lines  are  nncon- 
tracted.  His  survey  of  the  entire  realm  he  traverses  is  accurate,  patient,  and 
considerate.  No  objections  are  evaded.  No  conclusions  are  reached  by  saltatory 
movements.  The  utmost  fairness  and  candor  characterize  his  discussions.  No 
more  thoroughly  scientific  work  In  plan  or  method  or  spirit  has  been  done  in  our 
time.  On  almost  every  page  one  meets  with  evidences  of  a  wide  and  reflec- 
tive reading,  not  only  of  philosophy,  but  of  poetry  and  fiction  aa  well,  which 
enriches  and  illumines  the  whole  course  of  thought." 

THE  SELF-REVELATION  OF  GOD.  By  SAMUEL  HARRIS, 
D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  in  Yale  Col* 
lege.    8vo,  $3.50. 

In  this  volume  Dr.  Harris  presents  a  statement  of  the  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  God,  and  of  the  reality  of  His  revelation  of  Himself 
in  the  experience  or  consciousness  of  men,  and  the  verification  of  the 
same  by  His  further  revelation  of  Himself  in  the  constitution  and 
ongoing  of  the  universe,  and  in  Christ. 

PROF.  WM.  G.  T.  SHEDD,  D.D.,  in  TTw  Presbyterian  Review.— "Sacb  a 
work  is  not  brought  out  in  a  day,  but  is  the  growth  of  years  of  professional  study 
and  reflection.  Few  books  on  apologetics  have  been  recently  produced  that  will 
be  more  influential  and  formative  upon  the  mind  of  the  theological  or  philosophi- 
cal student,  or  more  useful.  It  is  calculated  to  Influence  opinions,  and  to  influence 
them  truthfully,  seriously,  and  strongly." 

BISHOP  HURST,  in  The  Northwestern  Christian  Advocate.— "We  do  not  inoyr 
a  better  work  among  recent  publications  than  this  one  for  building  up  old  hopes 
and  giving  a  new  strength  to  one's  faith.  The  book  Is  thoroughly  evangelic, 
fresh,  and  well  wrought  out.  It  ia  a  valuable  contribution  to  our  American 
Uieology." 


STANDARD   TEXT  BOOKS. 


THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING;  or,  Lectures  on  Homiletics. 
By  Professor  AUSTIN  PHELPS.    8vo,  $2.50. 

This  work  is  the  growth  of  more  than  thirty  years'  practical  ex- 
perience in  teaching.  The  writings  of  a  master  of  style,  of  broad  and 
catholic  mind  are  always  fascinating  ;  in  the  present  case  the  wealth 
of  appropriate  and  pointed  illustration  renders  this  doubly  the  case. 

THE  NEW  YORK  CHRISTIAN  ADVOCATE.— "Ministers  Of  all  denomlnationa 
and  of  all  degrees  of  experience  will  rejoice  la  it  as  a  veritable  mine  of  wisaom." 

THE  INDEPENDENT.—"  The  volume  is  to  be  commended  to  young  men  as  a 
■nperb  example  of  the  art  in  which  it  aims  to  instruct  them." 

THE  WATCHMAN.— "The  reading  of  it  is  a  mental  tonic.  The  preacher 
cannot  but  feel  often  his  heart  burning  within  him  under  Its  Influence.  We  could 
wish  it  might  be  in  the  hands  of  every  theological  student  and  of  every  pastor." 

MEN  AND  BOOKS;  OR,  STUDIES  IN  HOMILETICS.  Lectures 
Introductory  to  the  "Theory  of  Preaching."  By  Professor 
AUSTIN  PHELPS,  D.D.    Crown  8vo,  $2.00. 

Professor  Phelps'  second  volume  of  lectures  is  devoted  to  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  sources  of  culture  and  power  in  the  profession  of  the 
pulpit,  its  power  to  absorb  and  appropriate  to  its  own  uses  the  world 
of  real  life  in  the  present,  and  the  world  of  the  past,  as  it  lives  in 
books. 

PROFESSOR  GEORGE  P.  FISHER.— "It  la  a  liw  book,  animated  as  well  as 
sound  and  instructive.  In  which  conventionalities  are  brushed  aside,  and  the 
author  goes  straight  to  the  marrow  of  the  subject.  No  minister  can  read  it 
without  being  waked  up  to  a  higher  conception  of  the  possibilities  of  his  calling." 

BOSTON  WATCHMAN.—"  We  are  sure  that  no  minister  or  candidate  for  the 
ministry  can  read  It  without  profit.  It  ia  a  tonic  for  one's  mind  to  read  a  book  so 
laden  with  thought  and  suggestion,  and  written  in  a  style  so  fresh,  strong,  and 
bracing." 

A  TREATISE  ON  HOMILETICS  AND  PASTORAL  THEOLOGY. 
By  W.  G.  T.  SHEDD,  D.D.    Crown  8vo,  $2.50. 

In  this  work,  treating  of  the  main  points  of  Homiletics  and  Pastoral 
Theology,  the  author  handles  his  subject  in  a  masterly  manner,  and 
displays  much  original  and  highly  suggestive  thought.  The  Homileti- 
cal  part  is  especially  valuable  to  ministers  aud  those  in  training  for  the 
ministry.  Dr.  Shedd's  style  is  a  model  of  purity,  simplicity  and 
strength. 

THE  NEW  YORK  EVANGELIST.—"  We  cannot  but  regard  It  as,  on  the  whole, 
the  very  best  production  of  the  kind  with  which  we  are  acquainted.  The  topics 
discussed  are  of  the  first  importance  to  every  minister  of  Christ  engaged  In  active 
service,  and  their  discussion  Is  conducted  by  earnestness  as  well  as  ability,  and  In 
a  style  which  for  clear,  vigorous,  and  unexceptionable  English,  Is  itself  a  model." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  INTELLIGENCER.— "The  ablest  book  oo  the  subject  wUloh 
the  generation  has  produced." 


CHURCH    HISTORY. 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  With  a  View  of  th« 
State  of  the  Roman  World  at  the  Birth  of  Christ.  Bjf 
GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Church 
History  in  Yale  College.    8vo,  S2.50. 

1  HE  BOSTON  ADVERTISER.— "Prof.  Fisher  has  displayed  In  this,  as  in  his 
previous  published  writings,  that  catholicity  and  that  calm  judicial  quality  of 
mind  which  are  so  indispensable  to  a  true  historical  critic." 

THE  EXAMINER.— "The  volume  is  not  a  dry  repetition  of  well-known  facts. 
It  bears  the  marics  of  original  research.  Every  page  glows  with  freshness  of 
material  and  cholceness  of  diction." 

THE  EVANGELIST.— "The  volume  contains  an  amount  of  information  that 
makes  it  one  of  the  most  useful  of  treatises  for  a  student  In  philosophy  and 
theology,  and  must  secure  for  it  a  place  in  his  library  as  a  standard  authority." 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  By  GEORGE  P. 
FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in 
Yale  University.    8vo,  with  numerous  maps,  $3.50. 

This  work  is  in  several  respects  notable.  It  gives  an  able  presenta- 
tion of  the  subject  in  a  single  volume,  thus  supplying  the  need  of  a 
complete  and  at  the  same  time  condensed  survey  of  Church  History. 
It  will  also  be  found  much  broader  and  more  comprehensive  than  othei 
books  of  the  kind. 

HON.  GEORGE  BANCROFT.— "I  have  to  tell  you  of  the  pride  and  delight 
with  which  I  have  examined  your  rich  and  most  instructive  volume.  As  an 
American,  let  me  thank  you  for  producing  a  work  so  honorable  to  the  country." 

REV.  R.  S.  STORRS,  D.D.— "I  am  surprised  that  the  author  has  been  able  to 
put  such  multitudes  of  facts,  with  analysis  of  opinions,  definitions  of  tendencies, 
and  concise  personal  sketches,  into  a  narrative  at  once  so  graceful,  graphic,  and 
compact." 

PROF.  ALEXANDER  V.  G.  ALLEN,  Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Cambridge, 
Mass.— "Jt  has  the  merit  of  being  eminently  readable,  its  conclusions  rest  on  the 
widest  research  and  the  latest  and  best  scholarship,  it  keeps  a  just  sense  of  pro- 
portion In  the  treatment  of  topics,  tt  is  written  in  the  Interest  of  Christianity  as  a 
whole  and  not  of  any  sect  or  church,  It  Is  so  entirely  Impartial  that  It  is  not  easy 
to  discern  the  author's  sympathies  or  his  denominational  attitude,  and  It  has  tht 
great  advantage  of  dwelling  at  due  length  upon  English  and  American  Churcli 
history.  In  short,  it  Is  a  work  which  no  one  but  a  long  and  successful  teacher  d 
Church  History  could  have  produced." 


STANDARD    TEXT  BOOKS. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  By  PHILIP  SCHAFF, 
D.D.  New  Edition,  re-written  and  enlarged.  Vol.  1,-Apos- 
tolic  Christianity,  A.D.  1-100.  Vol.  Il.-Ante-Nicene  Chris- 
tianity, A.D.  100-325.  Vol.  III.— Nicene  and  Post-Nicene 
Christianity,  A.D.  311-600.  Vol.  IV.— Mediaeval  Christianity, 
A.D.  590— 1073.  Vol.  VI.— Modern  Christianity.  The  German 
Reformation,  A.D.  1517-1530.    8vo,  price  per  vol.,  S4.00. 

This  work  is  extremely  comprehensive.  All  subjects  that  properly 
belong  to  a  complete  sketch  are  treated,  including  the  history  of  Chris- 
tian art,  liymnology,  accounts  of  the  lives  and  chief  w^orks  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  etc.  The  great  theological,  christological,  and 
anthropological  controversies  of  the  period  are  duly  sketched  ;  and  in 
all  the  details  of  history  the  organizing  hand  of  a  master  is  distinctly 
seen,  shaping  the  mass  of  materials  into  order  and  system. 

PROF.  GEO.  P.  FISHER,  Of  Tale  College.— "Hv.  Schaff  has  thoroughly  and 
successfully  accomplished  his  task.  The  volumes  are  replete  with  evidences  of  a 
careful  study  of  the  original  scurces  and  of  an  extraordinary  and,  we  might  say, 
unsurpassed  acquaintance  with  the  modern  literature— German,  French,  and 
English— in  the  department  of  ecclesiastical  history.  They  are  equally  marked  liy 
a  fair-minded,  conscientious  spirit,  as  well  as  by  a  lucid,  animated  mode  of 
presentation." 

PROF.  ROSWELL  D.  HITCHCOCK,  D.D.— "In  no  other  Single  work  of 
its  kind  with  which  I  am  acquainted  will  students  and  general  readers  find  so 
much  to  instruct  and  interest  them." 

DR.  JUL.  MULLER,  of  Halle.— "It  Is  the  only  history  of  the  first  six  cen- 
turies which  truly  satisfies  the  wants  of  the  present  age.  It  Is  rich  In  results  of 
original  investigation." 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST,  IN  CHRONOLOGI- 
CAL TABLES.  A  Synchronistic  View  of  the  Events,  Charac- 
teristics, and  Culture  of  each  period,  including  the  History  of 
Polity,  Worship,  Literature,  and  Doctrines,  together  with  two 
Supplementary  Tables  upon  the  Church  in  America;  and  an 
Appendix,  containing  the  series  of  Councils,  Popes,  Patri- 
archs, and  other  Bishops,  and  a  full  Index.  By  the  late 
HENRY  B.  SMITH,  D.D.,  Professor  in  the  Union  Theologi- 
cal Seminary  of  the  City  of  New  York.    Folio,  $5.00. 

REV.  DR.  W.  G.  T.  SHEDD.— "  Prof.  Smith's  Historical  Tables  are  the  best 
that  I  know  of  in  any  language.  In  preparing  such  a  work,  with  so  much  care  and 
research,  Prof.  Smith  has  furnished  to  the  student  an  apparatus  that  will  be  of 
life-long  service  to  him" 

REV.  DR.  WILLIAM  ADAMS.— "The  labor  expended  upon  such  a  work  Is 
immense,  and  its  accuracy  and  completeness  do  honor  to  the  research  and 
scholarship  of  its  author,  and  are  an  invaluable  acquisition  to  our  literature." 


CHARLES  SGRIBNERS  SONS' 


LECTURES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  JEWISH  CHURCH.  By 
ARTHUR  PENRHYN  STANLEY,  D.D.  With  Maps  and  Plans. 
New  Edition  from  New  Plates,  with  the  author's  latest  revis- 
ion. Part  I.— From  Abraham  to  Samuel.  Part  II.— From 
Samuel  to  the  Captivity.  Part  III.— From  the  Captivity  to 
the  Christian  Era.  Three  vols.,  12mo  (sold  separately),  each 
$2.00. 

The  same— Westminster  Edition.  Three  vols.,  8vo  (sold  in  sets 
only),  per  set,  $9.00. 

LECTURES  ON  THE   HISTORY  OF  THE  EASTERN   CHURCH. 

With  an  introduction  on  the  Study  of  Ecclesiastical  History. 
By  ARTHUR  PENRHYN  STANLEY,  D.D.  New  Edition  from 
New  Plates.    12mo,  $2.00. 

LECTURES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  SCOT- 
LAND. By  ARTHUR  PENRHYN  STANLEY,  D.D.  8vo,  $1.50. 

In  all  that  concerns  the  external  characteristics  of  the  scenes  and 
persons  described,  Dr.  Stanley  is  entirely  at  home.  His  books  are  not 
dry  records  of  historic  events,  but  animated  pictures  of  historic  scenes 
and  of  the  actors  in  them,  while  the  human  motives  and  aspects  of 
events  are  brought  out  in  bold  and  full  relief. 

THE  LONDON  CRITIC— "Earnest,  eloquent,  learned,  with  a  style  that  Is 
never  monotonous,  but  luring  through  its  eloquence,  the  lectures  will  maintain 
hia  fame  as  author,  scholar,  and  divine.  We  could  point  out  many  passages  that 
glow  with  a  true  poetic  Are,  but  there  are  hundreds  plctorlally  rich  and  poetically 
true.  The  reader  experiences  no  weariness,  for  In  every  page  and  paragraph 
there  la  something  to  engage  the  mind  and  refresh  the  soul." 

THE  NEW  ENGLANDER.—"  We  have  first  to  express  our  admiration  of  the 
grace  and  graphic  beauty  of  his  style.  The  felicitous  discrimination  in  the  use 
of  language  which  appears  on  every  page  is  especially  required  on  these  topics, 
where  the  author's  position  might  so  easily  be  mistaken  through  an  unguarded 
statement.  Dr.  Stanley  Is  possessed  of  the  prime  quality  of  an  historical  student 
md  writer— namely,  the  historical  feeling,  or  sense,  by  which  conditions  of  life 
jind  types  of  character,  remote  from  our  present  experience,  are  vividly  con- 
ceived of  and  truly  appreciated." 

THE  N.  Y.  TIMES.— "The  Old  Testament  History  is  here  presented  as  It 
never  was  presented  before ;  with  so  much  clearness,  elegance  of  style,  and  his- 
toric and  literary  illustration,  not  to  speak  of  learning  and  calmness  of  judgment, 
that  not  theologians  alone,  but  also  cultivated  readers  generally,  are  drawn  to  its 
pagea.  In  point  of  style  It  takes  rank  with  Macaulay's  History  an  3  the  beat 
chapters  of  Froude." 


STANDARD    TEXT  BOOKS. 


LECTURES  OM  MEDI/EVAL  CHURCH  HISTORY.  By  RICHARD 
C.  TRENCH,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  Dublin.    8vo,  $3.00. 

In  this  work  the  author  discusses  the  more  important  epochs  of 
Church  History,  tracing  the  origin  and  growth  of  various  sects  and 
sketching  the  careers  of  the  great  Schoolmen  and  Reformers.  Intro- 
ducing his  subject  with  a  general  consideration  of  the  study  of  Clnirch 
History,  he  devotes  his  early  chapters  to  the  beginning  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  the  conversion  of  England  and  Ger- 
many, Monasticism  and  the  Crusades,  with  accounts  of  the  Mendicant 
Orders  and  the  Waldenses.  His  later  chapters  trsat  of  the  great  coun- 
cils of  the  West,  Wiclif,  Hus,  and  their  followers,  with  a  view  of 
Christian  art,  life,  and  work  down  to  the  eve  of  the  Reformation. 

THE  CONFLICT  OF  CHRISTIANITY  WITH  HEATHENISM.  By 
Dr.  GERHARD  UHLHORN.  Translated  by  Prof.  Egbert  C. 
Smyth  and  Rev.  C.  J.  H.  Ropes.    Crown  8vo,  $2.50. 

This  volume  describes  with  extraordinary  vividness  and  spirit  the 
religious  and  moral  condition  of  the  Pagan  world,  the  rise  and  spread 
of  Christianity,  its  conflict  with  heathenism,  and  its  final  victory. 

THE  BOSTON  ADVERTISER.— "It  is  easy  to  see  Why  this  volume  Is  SO  highly 
esteemed.  It  is  systematic,  thorough,  and  concise.  But  its  power  is  in  the  wide 
mental  vision  and  well-balanced  imagination  of  the  author,  which  enable  him  to 
re-construct  the  scenes  of  ancient  history.  An  exceptional  clearness  and  force 
mark  his  style." 

THE  SUNDAY-SCHOOL  TIMES.— "One  might  read  many  books  without 
obtaining  more  than  a  fraction  of  the  profitable  information  here  conveyed,  and 
he  might  search  a  long  time  before  finding  one  which  would  so  thoroughly  fix 
hla  attention  and  command  his  interest " 

A  HISTORY  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE.    By  W.  G.  T.  SHEDD, 

Professor  of   Systematic    Theology    in    Union    Theological 
Seminary.    2  vols.,  8vo,  $5.00. 

The  work  is  divided  into  seven  books  :  1. — The  Influence  of  Philo- 
sophical Systems  ;  2. — History  of  Apologies  ;  3. — History  of  Theology; 
4. — History  of  Anthropology;  5. — Of  Soteriology;  6. — Of  Eschatol- 
^Sy  '■>  '''■ — Of  Symbols.  The  style  is  lucid  and  penetrating,  the  dis- 
cussions move  onward  according  to  the  law  of  the  subjects  themselves, 
as  evoked  in  history  ;  and  new  light  is  thrown  on  past  thought  by 
pertinent  illustration  from  subsequent  times. 

THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW.— "Dr.  Shedd  has  furnished  an  important 
contribution  to  the  study  of  Church  history.  It  is  eminently  a  readable  book,  and 
will,  no  doubt,  be  extensively  read  beyond  the  circle  of  his  own  profession  by 
Intelligent  laymen  in  all  walks  of  life." 

THE  N.  Y.  EVENING  POST.— "  A  body  of  theological  history  which  is  in  form 
aa  perfect  as  it  is  in  substance  exceiieat." 


BIBLICAL   STUDY. 


BIBLICAL  STUDY.  Its  Principles,  MetFiods,  and  History.  By 
CHARLES  A.  BRICGS,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew  and 
Cognate  Languages  in  Union  Theological  Seminary.  Crown 
8vo,  $2.50. 

The  author  has  aimed  to  present  a  guide  to  Biblical  Study  for  the 
intelligent  layman  as  well  as  the  theological  student  and  minister  of 
the  Gospel.  At  the  same  time  a  sketch  of  the  entire  history  of  each 
department  of  Biblical  Study  has  been  given,  the  stages  of  its  develop- 
ment are  traced,  the  normal  is  discriminated  from  the  abnormal,  and 
the  whole  is  rooted  in  the  methods  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles. 

THE  BOSTON  ADVERTISER.— "The  principles,  methods,  and  history  of 
Biblical  study  are  very  fully  considered,  and  it  is  one  of  the  best  works  of  Its  kind 
in  the  language,  if  not  the  only  book  wherein  the  modem  methods  of  the  study 
of  the  Bible  are  entered  into,  apart  from  direct  theological  teaching." 

THELONDON  SPECTATOR.— "Dr.  Briggs' bookis  one  Of  much  value,  not  the 
less  to  be  esteemed  because  of  the  moderate  compass  mto  which  its  mass  of  in- 
formation has  been  compressed." 

MESSIANIC  PROPHECY.    The  Prediction  of  the  Fulfilment  of 
Redemption  through  the  Messiah.    A  Critical  Study  of  the 
Messianic  Passages  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  Order  of 
their  Development.    By  CHARLES  A.  BRIGGS,  D.D.,  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  and  the  Cognate  Languages  in  the  Union 
Theological  Seminary.    Crown  8vo,  $2.50. 
In  this  work  the  author  develops  and  traces  "the  prediction  of 
the  fulfilment  of  redemption  through  the  Messiah"  through  the  whole 
series  of  Messianic  passages   and   prophecies  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Beginning  with  the  first  vague  intimations  of  the  great  central  thought 
of  redemption  he  arrays  one  prophecy  after  another  ;  indicating  clearly 
the  general  condition,  mental  and  spiritual,  out  of  which  each  prophecy 
arises  ;  noting  the   gradual  widening,  deepening,   and  clarification  of 
the  prophecy  as  it  is  developed  from  one  prophet  to  another  to  the 
end  of  the  Old  Testament  canon. 

THE  LONDON  ACADEMY.— "Bis  new  book  on  Messianic  Prophecy  is  a 
worthy  companion  to  his  Indispensable  text-book  on  Biblical  study.  He  has  pro- 
duced the  first  English  text-book  on  the  subject  of  Messianic  Prophecy  which  a 
modern  teacher  can  use." 

THE  EVANGELIST.— "Messianic  Prophecy  is  a  subject  of  no  common  inter- 
est, and  this  book  is  no  ordinary  book.  It  is,  on  the  contrary,  a  work  of  the  very 
first  order ;  the  ripe  product  of  years  of  study  upon  the  highest  themes.  It  la 
exegesis  in  a  master-hand." 


STANDARD   TEXT  BOOKS. 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  HISTORY.  According  to  the  Bible  and 
the  Traditions  of  the  Oriental  Peoples.  From  the  Creation 
of  Man  to  the  Deluge.  By  FRANCOIS  LENORMANT,  Pro- 
fessor of  Archaeology  at  the  National  Library  of  France,  etc. 
(Translated  from  the  Second  French  Edition).  With  an  in- 
troduction by  Francis  Brown,  Associate  Professor  in  Biblical 
Philology,  Union  Theological  Seminary.    12mo,  $2.50. 

THE  NEW  ENGLANDER.— "Mr.  Lenormant  la  not  only  a  believer  In  reve- 
lation, but  a  devout  confessor  of  what  came  by  Moses ;  as  well  as  of  what  came 
by  Christ.  In  this  explanation  of  Chaldean,  Babylonian,  Assyrian  and  Phenlclan 
tradition,  he  discloses  a  prodigality  of  thought  and  skill  allied  to  great  variety  ol 
pursuit,  and  diligent  manipulation  of  what  he  has  secured." 

THE  NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE.— "The  work  Is  one  that  deserves  to  be  studied 
by  all  students  of  ancient  history,  and  In  particular  by  ministers  of  the  Gospel, 
whose  office  requires  them  to  Interpret  the  Scriptures,  and  who  ought  not  to  be 
Ignorant  of  the  latest  and  most  interesting  contribution  of  science  to  the  elucida- 
tion of  the  sacred  volume." 

QUOTATIONS  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  By  C.  H.  TOY, 
O.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew  in  Harvard  University.  8vo,  $3.50i 

THE  CONGREGATIONALIST.— "  Textual  points  are  considered  carefully,  and 
ample  and  accurate  indexes  complete  the  work.  The  minute  and  patient 
thoroughness  of  his  examination  of  passages  and  the  clear  and  compact  arrange- 
ment of  his  views  render  his  book  remarkable.  The  difficulties  of  his  task  were 
great  and  he  has  shown  rare  skill  and  has  attained  noteworthy  success  in  meeting 
them." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  EVANGELIST.— "Prof.  Toy's  collection  and  comparison  of 
the  passages  quoted  in  the  New  and  Old  Testament  is  a  fine,  scholarly  piece  of 
work.  It  surpasses  anything  that  has  been  done  by  European  scbolarsliip  in  tills 
field." 

THE  CHALDEAN  ACCOUNT  OF  GENESIS.  By  GEORGE 
SMITH,  of  the  Department  of  Oriental  Antiquities,  British 
Museum.  A  New  Edition,  revised  and  corrected  (with  addi- 
tions), by  A.  H.  Sayce.    8vo,  $3.00. 

THE  N.  Y.  GUARDIAN.— "It  is  impossible  In  few  words  to  give  any  adequate 
impression  of  the  exceeding  value  of  this  work.  This  volume  is  sure  to  find  its 
way  into  the  public  libraries  of  the  country,  and  the  important  facts  wMcli  11 
contains  should  be  scattered  everywhere  among  the  people." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  INTELLIGENCER.— "The  accompUshed  Aflsyrlologist  Prof. 
Sayce  has  gone  over  the  whole  with  the  advantage  of  a  large  number  of  additional 
texts,  and  has  carefully  brought  the  book  up  to  the  level  of  the  present  knowl- 
edge of  the  subject.  The  book  as  it  stands  is  a  very  important  verification  of 
the  early  Hebrew  records." 


CHARLES  SCRIBNEES  SONS* 


DOGMATIC    THEOLOGY.     By  WILLIAM    G.  T.  SHEDD,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology.    2  vols.,  8vo,  $7.00. 

CHRISTIAN  INTELLIGENCER.—"  The  pabUcation  of  a  System  of  Theology  bj 
Prof.  Shedd  marks  an  epoch  in  scientific  religious  thought.  His  training  has 
been  such  as  to  fit  him  exceptionally  for  this  culminating  work.  A  great  charm 
In  these  bulky  volumes  is  the  beautifully  clear,  precise,  and  simple  style  in  which 
they  are  written.  The  layman  can  read  them  with  as  much  ease  and  interest  as 
the  professional  theologian." 

JOHN  DE  WITT,  In  Presbyterian  Rfview.— "It  is  didactic  rather  than 
polemic.  He  states,  expounds,  and  defends  what  he  believes  to  be  the  true  view, 
and  spends  little  time  in  expounding  and  opposing  heresies.  The  discussions  are 
compact.    The  style  is  absolutely  clear." 

NEW  YORK  EXAMINER.— "The  two  volumes  are  the  result  of  eighteen  years 
of  special  study  and  of  forty  years'  labor  in  theological  research.  The  treatment 
Is  such  as  might  be  expected  of  Dr.  Shedd:  scholarly,  devout,  profound, 
thorough." 

PRACTICAL  THEOLOGY.  A  Manual  for  Theological  Students. 
By  J.  J.  VAN  OOSTERZEE,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Theology 
in  the  University  of  Utrecht.  Translated  and  adapted  to 
the  use  of  English  readers  by  Maurice  J.  Evans.   8vo,  $3.50. 

rhis  is  the  result  of  instruction  in  practical  theology,  given  by  the 
author  during  a  period  of  fifteen  years  at  the  University  of  Utrecht, 
but  its  original  form  has  been  modified  or  supplemented  to  adapt  it 
more  completely  for  use  as  a  text-book.  As  an  additional  feature  of 
interest  the  historic  portion  of  the  work  contains  such  brief  notices  of 
our  leading  Anglo  Saxon  preachers,  Christian  poets,  and  catechists,  as 
seemed  necessary  to  furnish  the  connecting  link  in  English  Church 
History  between  the  movements  of  the  Reformation  age  and  those  of 
our  own  day,  and  to  make  evident  the  unbroken  continuity  of  the 
Church's  life  amidst  the  constant  variation  of  outward  forms, 

CHRISTIAN  DOGMATICS.   A  Text-book  for  Academical  Instruc- 
tion and  Private  Study.    By  J.  J.  VAN  OOSTERZEE,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Utrecht.    Trans- 
lated by  John  W.  Watson,  B.A.,  and  Maurice  J.  Evans,  B.A. 
Two  vols.,  8vo,  $5.00. 
THE  PRESBYTERIAN  BANNER.— "The  volumes  before  us  are  a  rich  mine 
for  the  student  and  the  theologian.    The  arrangement  is  good,  the  style  clear, 
and  the  spirit  evidently  evangpllcal.    The  study  of  these  volumes  will  stimulate 
thought,  enlarge  the  vision,  and  sfeugthen  faith,  while  they  will  supply  ricb 
material  for  all  whose  calling  it  Is  to  preacn  the  gospel." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  INTELLIGENCER.— "Dr.  Van  Oosterzee  Is  undoubtedly  a 
ripe  and  distinguished  scholar,  and  the  work  before  us  is  his  greatest  and  most  suc- 
cessful effort.  It  has  already  received  high  commendation  from  some  of  the 
ablest  English  scholars,  and  is  certified  to  byDrs.  Smith  and  Schaff  as  giving 
•  the  mature  results  of  long-continued,  earnest,  and  devout  study  of  the  artlclei 
of  our  Christian  faith ;'  who  also  add  that  'it  wiU  prove  a  safe  and  useful  guid« 
to  students  in  our  institotloQS of  learning.'" 


SYSTEMATIC   THEOLOGY. 


SYSTEIVTATIC  THEOLOGY.  By  CHARLES  HODQE,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

late  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary.    New  Edition,  com* 
piete  in  three  volumes,  including  index.   8vo,  $12.00. 

In  these  volumes  are  comprised  the  results  of  the  life-long  labors 
and  investigations  of  one  of  the  most  eminent  theologians  of  the  day. 
The  work  covers  the  ground  usually  occupied  by  treatises  on  Systematic 
Theology,  and  adopts  the  commonly  received  divisions  of  the  subject : 
Vol.1. — Theology;  Vol.11. — Anthropology;  Vol.111. — Soteriology 
and  Eschatology.  The  Introduction  is  devoted  to  the  consideration  of 
method,  or  the  principles  which  should  guide  the  student  of  theology, 
and  the  different  theories  as  to  the  source  and  standard  of  our  knowl- 
edge of  divine  things,  Rationalism,  Mysticism,  the  Roman  Catholic  doc- 
trine of  the  Rule  of  Faith,  and  the  Protestant  doctrine  on  that  subject. 

The  plan  of  the  author  is  to  state  and  vindicate  the  teachings  of 
the  Bible,  and  to  examine  the  antagonistic  doctrines  of  different  classes 
of  theologians. 

The  various  topics  are  discussed  with  that  close  and  keen  analytical 
and  logical  power,  combined  with  that  simplicity,  lucidity,  and 
etrength  of  style  which  have  already  given  Dr.  Hodge  a  world-wide 
reputation  as  a  controversialist  and  writer,  and  as  an  investigator  of 
the  great  theological  problems  of  the  day. 

THE  SUNDAY-SCHOOL  TIMES.— "It  Is  perhaps  not  too  mucli  to  say  of  it, 
Ihat  this  Is  the  most  Important  contribution  to  the  literature  of  theology  made 
Bince  the  days  of  Jonathan  Edwards.  The  reputation  of  Dr.  Hodge  in  this  depart- 
ment, by  reason  of  his  life-long  associations  and  his  eminent  abilities,  is  such  as 
to  command  for  him,  as  a  recognized  authority,  respectful  hearing  in  all  the 
ehm'chea." 

THE  NEW  YORK  CHRISTIAN  ADVOCATE.— "This  volume  is  a  monument 
of  thought  and  Christian  scholarship,  and  will  be  welcomed  and  studied  by 
Intelligent  minds  in  all  the  Christian  denominations." 

QUESTIONS  ON  THE  TEXT  OF  THE  SYSTEMATIC  THEOL- 
OGY of  Dr.  Charles  Hodge,  together  with  an  exhibition  of 
various  schemes  illustrating  the  principles  of  theological 
construction.  By  A.  A.  HODGE,  late  Professor  in  Princeton 
Theological  Seminary.    8vo,  paper,  $1.00  net. 

The  questions  contained  in  this  volume  are  designed  to  assist  the 
student  in  the  analysi,'^  of  the  text,  and  in  fixing  the  points  to  be 
grasped  by  his  understanding  and  retained  in  his  memory,  and  further 
for  the  use  of  the  professor  during  review  and  examination. 


CHARLES  SCBIBNER'S  SONS* 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  SACRED  SCRIPTURE.  A  Critical,  Hi*, 
torical,  and  Dogmatic  Inquiry  into  tlie  Origin  and  Nature 
of  tlie  Old  and  New  Testaments.  By  GEORCE  T.  LADD, 
D.D.,  Professor  of  Mental  and  Moral  Philosophy  in  Yale 
College.    2  vols.,  8vo,  $7.00. 

J.  HENRY  THAYER,  D.D.— "It  Is  the  most  elaborate,  erudite,  J udlcions  dl<?- 
cnsslon  of  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  In  its  various  aspects,  with  which  I  am 
acquainted.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that,  for  enabling  a  young  minister 
to  present  views  alike  wise  and  reverent  respecting  the  nature  and  use  of 
Sacred  Scripture,  nay,  for  giving  him  in  general  a  Biblical  outlook  upon  Chris- 
tian theology,  both  In  its  theoretical  and  its  practical  relations,  the  faithful  study 
of  this  thorough,  candid,  scholarly  work  wiU  be  worth  to  him  as  much  as  hall 
the  studies  of  his  seminary  course." 

GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D.,  LL. D.—"  Prof essor  Ladd's  work  is  from  the  peH  ol 
an  able  and  trained  scholar,  candid  in  spirit  and  thorough  In  his  researches.  It 
la  so  comprehensive  in  Its  plan,  so  complete  in  the  presentation  of  facts,  and  so 
closely  related  to  'the  burning  questions'  of  the  day,  that  it  cannot  fail  to  enlist 
the  attention  of  all  earnest  students  of  theology." 

WORD  STUDIES  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  By  MARVIN  R. 
VINCENT,  D.D.  Vol.  I.-The  Synoptic  Gospels,  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  and  the  Epistles  of  Peter,  James  and  Jude.  Vol. 
II.— The  Writings  of  John— The  Gospel,  the  Epistles,  the 
Apocalypse.    8vo,  per  vol.,  $4.00.     Vol.  III.  ready. 

The  purpose  of  the  author  is  to  enable  the  English  reader  and 
student  to  get  at  the  original  force,  meaning,  and  color  of  the  Bignifi- 
cant  words  and  phrases  as  used  by  the  different  writers.  An  introduc- 
tion to  the  comments  upon  each  book  sets  forth  in  compact  form  what 
is  known  about  the  author — how,  where,  with  what  object,  and 
with  what  peculiarities  of  style  he  wrote.  Dr.  Vincent  has  gathered 
from  all  sources  and  put  in  an  easily  comprehended  form  a  great  quan- 
tity of  information  of  much  value  to  the  critical  expert  as  well  as  to 
the  studious  laymau  who  wishes  to  get  at  the  real  spirit  of  the  Greek 
text. 

REV.  DR.  HOWARD  CROSBY.— "Dr.  Vincent's  'Word  Studies  in  the  New 
Testament '  is  a  delicious  book.  As  a  Greek  scholar,  a  clear  thinker,  a  logical 
reasoner,  a  master  in  English,  and  a  devout  sympathizer  with  the  truths  of  reve- 
lation, Dr.  Vincent  is  just  the  man  to  interest  and  edify  the  Church  with  such  a 
work  as  this.  There  are  few  scholars  who,  to  such  a  degree  as  Dr.  Vincent, 
mingle  scholarly  attainment  with  aptness  to  Impart  knowledge  in  attractive  form. 
All  Bible-readers  should  enjoy  and  profit  by  these  delightful '  Word  Studies.' " 

DR.  THEO.  L.  CUYLER,  In  Tfie  K  T.  Evangelist.— " The  very  things  which 
a  young  minister— and  many  an  older  one  also— ought  to  know  about  the  chief 
words  in  his  New  Testament  he  will  be  able  to  learn  In  this  affluent  volume. 
Years  of  close  study  by  one  of  our  brightest  Greek  scholars,  have  been  condensed 
Into  Its  pages."      ' 


% 


